West Bengal

South 24 Parganas

CC/87/2015

Sri Prosenjit Mukherjee, S/O Late Satyendranath Mukherjee. - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. District Engineer South West Regional Office. C.E.S.C. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Mousumi Banerjee.

13 Aug 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPLUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , JUDGES’ COURT, ALIPORE KOLKATA-700 027

 

         C.C. CASE NO. _87_ OF ___2015__

 

DATE OF FILING : 18.2.2015                  DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: _13.8.2015___

 

Present                        :   President       :   Udayan Mukhopadhyay

 

                                        Member(s)    :    Mrs. Sharmi Basu & Jinjir Bhattacharya

                                                                             

COMPLAINANT             :   Sri Prosenjit Mukherjee,s/o late Satyendranath Mukherjee of 41/C, 41/B, S.NH. Chatterjee Road, P.S. Behala, Kolkata – 38 , presently residing at 144C, West Vinod Nagar, 2^nd Floor, Block-B, Street No.1, Delhi – 110092.

 

-VERSUS  -

 

O.P/O.Ps                            :  1. District Engineer (South West Regional office), CESC Ltd. of P-18, Taratala Road, P.S. Taratala, Kolkata – 88.

                                            2.     Hindustan Corporation, 108, S.N. Roy Road, P.S Behala, Kol-38 , represented by Samaresh Das,s/o Haren Chandra Das of 108, S.N. Roy Road, P.S. Behala, Kolkata – 38.

                                            3.     The Officer-In-Charge, Behala P.S. Kolkata – 34.

________________________________________________________________________

 

                                                            J  U  D  G  E  M  E  N  T

 

Mrs. Sharmi Basu, Member

The instant case has been filed by the complainant under section  12 of the C.P Act, 1986 with allegation of deficiency in service against the O.Ps.

In a nutshell the case of the complainant is that Complainant is the Co-sharer of the Land measuring about 8 Cottah 4 Chittack 16 Sq.feer. which seized and possessed the said land your petitioner along with the co-owners of the said possession decided to develop the said land after demolishing the existing structure thereon.

The Opposite Party No – 2 herein made an offer to the land owners for the development of the aforesaid premises and accordingly one development agreement was executed by and between the land owners and the Opposite Party No – 2 developer herein. However after obtaining  possession he  made an application for installation of a new electric Meter in  his own name and accordingly paid the requisite fees to the Opposite Party No. 1. Thereafter the Opposite Party No. – 1 inspected the service line and existing Meter board and  issued M.A.S.D. Bill / Offer letter dated 16.04.2014 in favour of your petitioner. As per the M.A.S.D. Bill Rs. 1550/- (Rupees One Thousand Five hundred fifty Only) was deposited by the complainant  on 20.09.2014. On 29.09.2014 the men and agent of Opposite Party No. 1 came to the local for installation of new electric meter but as per the complainant Opposite Party No. 1 with an malafide intention and for wrongful gain objected against the supply of installation of new meter. However the men and agents of Opposite Party No 1 compelled to return without discharging their duties.

Thereafter he  made all endeavor and took all steps before the Opposite Party No. 1 for installation of new electric Meter but all in vain.

He also prayed for police protection and made a G.D. vide No -2774 dated 29.09.2014 before the Behala Police Station to take necessary steps against the Opposite Party No. 2. However due to overt and covered action by the Opposite Party No. 2. O.P. 1 failed Causing untold misery and hardship and compelling the complainant  to live in darkness. Hence, this case.

O.P. 1, CESC Ltd. has appeared through Ld. Advocate by filing W/V and denied all the material allegation raised against him and interalia stated that due to strong objection raised by OP 2 at the time of statutory inspection by the personnel’s of OP 1 for installation of new meter, OP 1 could not be able to supply new connection of electricity as per prayer of the complainant and OP 1 has also submitted that OP 1 is ready and willing to give supply to the complainant. On compliance of all necessary formalities of the OP 1 and if free access will be given to the men. Of OP 1 at the time of installation of new meter.

In brief the case of the OP 2 is that OP 2 is the developer of the premises where the residential flat of the complainant is situated.  And the complainant is trying to enjoy electric connection violating the development agreement which was signed but the complainant. As landowner and OP 2 as developer (dt. 29.01.2009).

Therefore, the complainant has no other alternative but to come before this Forum for redressal of his dispute with the prayers as mentioned in the complaint petition.

After scrutinizing four corners of the case following points are in limelight :

1.             Whether the complainant is a Consumer or not.
2. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps or not.
3. Whether the complainant is eligible to get relief as prayed for partly or fully.

Decision with reasons

            It is admitted fact that the complainant paid the statutory amount to the O.P-1 (CESC) for having a new electric connection at this residence. Therefore, the complainant is “intending consumer” of the O.P-1 and O.P-1 is the “service provider” under the purview of the C.P Act, 1986 under section n 2(1)(d)(ii) and 2(1)(d)(O)  respectively.

            It is bound doubt that electricity is essential service and in modern civilization without electricity day to day life is next to impossible. Moreover, as per Electricity Act as well as valuable observation of Hon’ble Apex Court even a trespasser is also entitled for electricity. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the complainant is entitled to get new electric connection at his residence. It is also fact that being a service provider O.P-1 has tried their level best but due to objection of the O.p-2, O.P-1 failed to give the connection and O.P-1 is ready and willing to give the connection if police protection will be given at the cost of the complainant Therefore, considering four corners of the case and keeping in mind the balance of convenience and inconvenience of the parties including O.P-2, it is opined by this Forum that the case of the complainant is allowed in pat.

            Thus all the points are discussed and all are in favour of the complainant and the case succeeds.

            Hence,

                                                                                    Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest without cost.

O.P-1 is directed to provide electric connection by installing new electric meter in the premises of the complainant at the existing meter board within 30 days from this date on receipt of the necessary statutory amount from the complainant.

O.P-1 is further directed to take police help if any obstruction  is made by anybody at the time of providing electric connection and O.P-3 , concerned Police station, is directed to render all sorts of assistance to the O.P-1 CESC at the time of providing new electric connection along with meter and complainant will bear charges, if any, for the police help.

In the facts and circumstances we pass no order as to compensation and cost.

 

Let a plain copy of this order be served upon the parties free of cost.

 

Member                                                           Member                                               President        

            President Dictated and corrected by me

 

 

                                                Member

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The judgement in separate sheet is ready and is delivered in open Forum. As it is ,

Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest without cost.

O.P-1 is directed to provide electric connection by installing new electric meter in the premises of the complainant at the existing meter board within 30 days from this date on receipt of the necessary statutory amount from the complainant.

O.P-1 is further directed to take police help if any obstruction  is made by anybody at the time of providing electric connection and O.P-3 , concerned Police station, is directed to render all sorts of assistance to the O.P-1 CESC at the time of providing new electric connection along with meter and complainant will bear charges, if any, for the police help.

In the facts and circumstances we pass no order as to compensation and cost.

 

Let a plain copy of this order be served upon the parties free of cost.

 

Member                                                           Member                                               President