DATE OF FILING : 30.03.2016.
DATE OF S/R : 23.05.2016.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 16.09.2016.
Kakali Saha @ Mondal,
wife of Sri Sudip Mondal,
Andul Purbapara, Jhama Bhaban, near Jayaint Abasan,
P.S. Sankrail, District Howrah,
PIN 711302..…………………………………….…………………… COMPLAINANT.
- A.E. & Station Manager,
Andul Mouri CCC ( Customer Care Centre ),
Andul, Howrah, WBSEDCL,
Howrah 711302.
- Regional Manager,
Office of the Regional Manager,
13, Netaji Subhas Road,
Howrah 711101.
- Smt. Kabari Saha @ Satpati,
wife of Sri Swapan Kumar Satpati of
Srijan Heritage Enclave,
345, Rajarhat Main Road,
Kolkata 700 136…….………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.
F I N A L O R D E R
- This is an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the petitioner, Kakali Saha @ Mondal, against the o.p. 1, Assistant Engineer cum Station Manager, Andul – Mouri, WBSEDCL & others, praying for a direction on the o.p. no. 1 & 2 to install new service connection in the premises of the petitioner and direct the o.p. no. 3 not to obstruct the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 while such new connection is provided and direct the local police station to assist the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 during such new service connection.
- The case of the petitioners is that he is absolute owner and occupier of the schedule mentioned flats measuring 868 sq. ft. including super built up area and anther flat measuring 449 sq. ft. including super built up area and two rooms at basement with common facility situated at Andul Purbapara, P.S. Sankrail, and applied for electric connection before the o.p. nos. 1 & 2. The o.p. no. 3 has delivered possession of the schedule mentioned flat to the petitioner after executing and registering the deed of gift. The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 received Rs. 200/- from the petitioner for rendering such connection but later on the o.p. no. 1 claims seven documents from the petitioner for rendering such connection and the petitioner complied the order of o.p. no. 1 but no connection is given yet. On 27.01.2016 the o.p. no. 1 informed the petitioner by a letter dated 27.01.2016 that they could not process the connection as objection raised by co-owner Kabari Saha @ Satpati, o.p. no. 3, who is never a co-owner of the flat of the petitioner who is 16 anna owner and occupier of the same. As the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 failed to install, so there is clear deficiency on their part and after serving legal notice the petitioner filed this case.
- The o.p. nos. 1 & 2, WBSEDCL, contested the case by filing a written version denying the allegations made against them and submitted that the petitioner applied for a fresh connection together with deposit of Rs. 200/- but the o.p. by his letter dated 27.01.2016 informed the petitioner that she has to collect necessary clearance from co-owner Kabari Saha @ Satpati, o.p. no. 3 who obstructed such connection. Further the connection prayed for is commercial in nature so the case be dismissed against o.p. nos. 1 & 2.
- The o.p. no. 3 by filing a written version denying the allegations made against her, submitted that the complainant is owner and co-sharer of the ground floor and basement of the building measuring 868 sq. ft. The o.p. no. 3 has gifted willfully the aforesaid property to the petitioner who is not the owner of the whole ground floor. The property is still under construction and the petitioner and the o.p. no. 3 are residing therein. The o.p. no. 3 being the owner of the land wanted electric connection and the o.p. no. 1 recommended the same and accordingly o.p. no. 3 has filled up a form after discussing the matter with o.p. no. 1. But before o.p. no. 3 submits her application and has applied for meter without letting the o.p. no. 3 know about the same. Once the o.p. no. 3 came to know about the same then he requested o.p. no. 1that the main meter being in her name be installed. The o.p. no. 3 is ready to take new main connection in her name in the building and then the petitioner can take his new connection in her own name.
- Upon pleadings of parties the following points arose for determination :
- Is the case maintainable in its present form ?
- Whether the petitioner has any cause of action to file the case ?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. no. 1, WBSEDCL ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- All the issues are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity for discussion and to skip off reiteration. In support of her case the petitioner filed affidavit as well as money receipts amounting to Rs. 200/- & Rs. 4,606/- issued by o.p. no. 1 & 2 in her favour. On scrutiny of the papers submitted by the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 and o.p. no. 3 the Forum finds that there is no objection for getting fresh electric connection in favour of complainant. The o.p. no. 3 stated that she gifted the property in favour of the complainant and the documents proved the fact that the petitioner is in possession of the case mentioned flat and she applied for fresh electric connection in her flat and none can deny such fresh electric connection to her.
- Our Supreme Court in the case of Chandra Khamura vs. Nayan Mallick and others opined that the distribution company is to supply electricity to the applicant as the distribution licensee had a duty to the applicant whether he is owner or occupier. Our High Court in the case Abhimunya Majumdar, Superintendent Engineer and another categorically opined that a person who is in settled position of a property whether he is a trespasser or unauthorized encroacher, squatter of any premises yet he can apply for fresh electric connection without consent of the owner and is entitled to get electricity and enjoy the same until he is evicted by due process of law.
Thus keeping in mind the submissions of the ld. counsels of both sides as well as the contents of the petition as well as the written version, this Forum finds that the petitioner is entitled to get electric connection as she had became successful in proving their case.
In the result, the application succeeds.
Court fee paid is correct.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. No. 123 of 2016 be and the same is allowed on contest without costs against the O.P. nos. 1 & 2 and o.p. no. 3.
The O.P. nos. 1 & 2 are directed to render fresh electric connection in the residential flat of the petitioner by installing new electric meter within 30 days from the date of this order.
No order is passed as to compensation as deficiency is not established.
The complainant is at liberty to put the final order into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( B. D. Nanda )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
