03/07/2012
Complainant : M.Sundarapandyan, 2/43/1, Paravattani, Thrissur.
(By Adv.A.D.Benny, Thrissur)
Respondents : 1. Asst. Secretary, Thrissur Corporation Electricity wing,
Thrissur Corporation, Thrissur.
2. Thrissur Corporation, rep. by Secretary, Thrissur
Corporation, Thrissur.
. (By Adv..M.Vinod,Thrissur)
ORDER
By Sri.M.S.Sasidharan, Member
The case of complainant is that the complainant applied for a new electricity connection to start a new shop for his sons for his livelihood by means of self employment. But the respondents have replied that there existed cases in the Forum against the amount to be remitted in favour of the electricity connection in his name. Hence new connection can only be given after withdrawing the cases. But the respondents have no right to deny the connection. The complainant had remitted the prescribed fees and other things to get the new connection. So the denial of new connection is illegal. Hence the complaint filed.
2. The respondents denied the allegation in the version filed by them. They have stated there in that the new connection is applied for business purpose and it is not correct that the connection is used for livelihood. So the complainant does not come under the purview of ‘consumer’ under the Consumer Protection Act. And the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant already had two connection No.9/2696, 15440 in the very same premises. There are dues in these connections. So new connection cannot be given without remitting the dues. The complainant filed CC.937/2005 against the electricity bills issued to him and the case is pending in the Forum. The complainant has to pay huge amount as per the office records of the respondents. Hence no new connection can be given to such a consumer as per the existing rules. However as per the interim order of the Forum a new connection was given to the complainant. And no deficiency in service is committed by the respondents. Hence dismiss the complaint.
3. Points for consideration are that :
1) Is the complaint maintainable ?
2) Is the complainant entitled to get the new electricity connection as claimed ?
3) Other reliefs and costs ?
4. Evidence consists of Exhibits P1-P3 and the oral testimony by the PW1. No evidence is adduced by the respondents.
5. The complainant’s case is that he applied for a new electricity connection to begin a new shop for his sons for his livelihood by means of self employment. But the respondents denied this. They have argued that the new connection is applied for business purpose and not as self employment. So they have argued that the complainant is not a consumer and the complaint is not maintainable.
6. The complainant is examined as PW1. While cross examining the PW1 even a single word has been asked to reveal that the new connection is applied for business purpose and not as self employment. On the other side the complainant has stated that the new shop is for the livelihood of his son by means of self employment. Since the livelihood has pleaded and there is no evidence against it. The complainant definitely comes under the purview of the consumer as defined under Section 2(1)(d) (ii)of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 and the complaint found maintainable.
7. The complainant applied for a new electricity connection to begin a business for his son for this livelihood. But the respondents denied the connection. The respondents have stated that there are other connection in the premises to which huge amounts of arrears are pending. The complainant has challenged these amounts in the various cases filed against the respondents before the Forum. And these cases are pending to be disposed. Under these circumstances new connection cannot be given unless the arrear are remitted or withdraw the cases. Exhibit P2 is the receipt given by the respondents when they accepted the application for the new connections. Exhibit P1 is the letter given to the complainant informing him that the new connection can only be given after disposing the cases or withdrawing the cases and inform as such by the complainant. While cross examining the PW1 he has deposed that
Hence it is revealed that even though the complainant is using the existing connection they are in the name of his father and he applied the new connection in his name. But it was denied as the cases against the bills issued in these connections are pending in the Forum. But it is rather injustice to deny the legitimate right of consumer stating that the cases filed by him are pending. The consumer has every right to approach the
Forum against the alleged deficiency in service. And action can be initiated against him on the basis of the disposal of each cases.
In the result the complaint is allowed and the order in IA1187/05 dated 12/9/2005 is made absolute. There is no order to compensation or cost.
Dictated to the Confdl. Asst., transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 3rd day of July 2012.
Sd/-
M.S.Sasidharan, Member
Sd/-
Padmini Sudheesh, President
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits
Ext. P1 Reply to Notice
Ext. P2 Receipt
Ext. P3 Notice
Complainant’s witness
PW1 – M.Sundarapandyan
Id/- Member
