AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THE dispute between the parties arose on the issue of a bill for Rs. 25,466.50 covering for the period from May, 1989 to December, 1990.
ADMITTEDLY the meter was defective at that material point of time and the defective meter was replaced in November, 1989 and thereafter meter reading was found correct. It is alleged that the said impugned bill was prepared on the alleged ground of increase in numbers of points of users of electricity on average basis. It is again alleged by the complainant/appellant that the opposite party/ respondent has been charging at higher rate per unit of consumption for electricity than the rate imposed by W.B.S.E.B.
It is further allegation of the appellant that he paid the impugned bill to avoid disconnection, but when it was found that the average consumption of the meter was far below then the amount of the impugned bill, he protested the impugned bill and demanded refund of Rs. 13,511.10 with interest @ 14%.
IN the aforesaid facts, the learned District Forum dismissed the complaint of the appellant by its order dated 8.9.94 in Misc. (Forum) Case No. 42 of 19992. It is admitted by both the parties that the meter in question was defective at that material point of time but the reason assigned by the respondent that due to over-load used by the appellant than the sanctioned load, the meter got damaged and defective so frequently. The said stand taken by the respondent is not based on any sound argument. However, the fact remains that the meter was defective at that time.
THE dispute between the parties evolves out two issues, firstly, if the impugned bill prepared on the basis of assumed consumption was legal and valid in view of the meter being remained defective, secondly, if the electricity charges released by the respondent at a higher rate of Rs. 2.60 per unit than the rate of Rs. 1/- per unit imposed by the West Bengal State Electricity Board amounts to illegal sale of electricity and contravenes the provisions of Indian Electricity Act, 1912. Both the issues ought to have been referred to the Electrical Inspector for decision and pending decision the respondent could not issue bill or threaten disconnection of supply of electricity as per principle laid down by Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of MPEB & Others v. Smt. Basant Bai, reported in AIR 1988 SC 71. In view of the fact that the meter was admittedly defective, the bill for Rs. 25,466.50 drawn by the respondent was illegal.
ACCORDINGLY, the appeal is allowed on contest. The order dated 8.9.94 in Misc. (Forum) Case No. 42 of 1992 is set aside.
THE dispute involving two issues as stated above be referred to the Chief Electrical Inspector, Government of West Bengal, 1, Harish Mukherjee Road for adjudication and the C.E.I. would dispose of the matters of dispute within 2 months from the date of reference. We also set aside the impugned bill for Rs. 25,466.50 and the amount on account of the electricity consumption payable by the appellant would be determined by the Chief Electrical Inspector and the adjustment be made accordingly against payment of Rs. 25,466.50 issuing a fresh bill by the respondent in this regard.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to the cost. Appeal allowed.