Date of filing      :  12.11.2014

                Date of S/R         : 17.02.2015

                Date of Order     : 10.12.2015

                SHRI JAWAHAR LAL SHAW

              S/O Lt. Jhari Shaw,

              Residing at 8, Sreenath Porel Lane, 3^rd floor,

              P.S. & District-Howrah-………………………………………………………….Complainant

                                                                Vs.

      1)   CESC Ltd .

             433/1, G. T. Road (north) ,

District- Howrah-711101.

        2)  The General Manager,

              CESC Ltd.,

              CESC House.,

              1, Chowrangi Squre,Kolkata-700001.

          3) Smt. Radhadevi Shaw,

W/o- Sri Ramchandra Shaw,

Residing at 8, Sreenath Porel Lane, 1^stfloor.

P.S & District-Howrah.

          4) Shri Bijay Shaw,

W/o- Sri Ramchandra Shaw,

Residing at 8, Sreenath Porel Lane, 1^stfloor.

P.S & District-Howrah.

P R E S E N T

………………………………………………………………………………………..

President : Shri B. D. Nanda.

Member: Smt. J. Saha.

Member: Shri A. K. Pathak.

 F I N A L   O R D E R

                This is an application U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986  filed by the Petitioner,  Jawharlal Show against the O.P. nos. 1 & 2,  CESC Ltd  AND O.P.3 others  praying for direction upon the O.P. CESC to  install the new electric connection over the property of the petitioner and to pay compensation of Rs. 5000/- .

                The case of the petitioner is that he  is the owner of holding NO. 8 Sreenath Porel Lane, P.S. & District Howrah, being  the property duly devolved upon him from his father Jhari Shaw.  The O.P. No. 3 & 4 are his sister and her son and O.P. No. 1 & 2 are CESC Ltd. The petitioner applied before the O.P. 1 for getting new domestic electric connection and as per instruction of O.P. No. 1 he deposited Rs. 1310/- on the basis of the MASD bill issued by CESC Ltd.  While coming to provide connection the O.P. No. 3 & 4 had a talk with O.P. No. 1 and without providing connection they went away in spite of several persuasion and so finding no alternative the petitioner filed this case. 

The O.P. 1 & 2 being CESC Ltd. contested the case by filing a written version denying the allegation made against them and submitted that they went to the property of the petitioner to install new electric connection and meter  in the premises but due to objection raised by O.P. No. 3 & 4 they had to come back as was unable to do the job and this false case of the petitioner be dismissed  against them as there is no deficiency on their part.

                O.P. 3 & 4 though appeared in the case but did not file any written version and remained absent from Forum and the case is thus heard exparte against them . 

On the above cases of the parties the following issues are frame :

1. Whether  the case maintainable in the present form ?
2. Whether the  petitioner has any  cause of action to file the case ?
3. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. nos. 1 & 2  ?
4. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the  reliefs as prayed for ?

Decision with reason

All this issues are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion and to skip of reiteration .  In support of his case the petitioner Jawahar Lal Shaw filed affidavit in chief along with documents showing that he made the security deposit and others and the O.P. 1 & 2 came to his house for giving new electric connection but due to objection raised by O.P. 3 & 4 they went back without giving new connection.  It is the case of the O.P 1 that due to objection raised by O.P. nos. 3 & 4 they could not new electric connection to  petitioner and so there is no deficiency in their part and the rest case of the petitioner regarding deposit etc. are conceded by the O.P. 1 & 2.  During the proceeding of the case the petitioner filed one petitioner for police assistance while rendering new connection to the petitioner and the same was allowed and duly  incorporated in proper place.

               Thus this Forum keeping in mind the submission of the counsel of  both sides and also on scrutiny of the main petition and the W/V and the documents, finds that the petitioner being owner of the property is entitled to new connection and no one in the world residing in a Municipal Corporation are or elsewhere can continue his normal life without water and electricity.

                In  view of above discussion and findings, the case  succeeds.

                Court fees paid is correct.

Hence,

                                                                                Ordered,

That the CC 579/2014 be and the same is allowed on contest against  the O.P. No. 1 & 2 and exparte against O.P. No. 3 & 4.

The petitioner is entitled to get the relief as prayed for except compensation as this Forum finds no deficiency in service on the part of O.P. 1 & 2.   The  O.P. 1 & 2 are directed to give such connection to the petitioner within 30 days from the date of order failing the petitioner would liberty to file execution after expiry of the period of appeal and if any objection arises then either the petitioner or the O.P. 1 to approach the I.C. of the local P.S who would provide necessary assistance.

Supply the copy of the order to the parties free of cost. 

Dictated and corrected

by me

     ( B. D. Nanda)

President, C.D.R.F. Howrah