DATE OF FILING : 10-12-2010.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 24-03-2011.
Mrs. Mina Dey,
w/o. Sri Sukumar Dey,
residing at 40/1, Madhu Sudan Pal Chowdury 1st Lane
District – Howrah .-------------------------------------------------------Complainant.
- Versus -
1. District Engineer,
CESC Ltd., of 433/1, G.T. Road ( N ),
Howrah – 711101.
2 Ram Awtar Kumar,
Son of Late Chitun Kumar,
Residing at 40/1, Madhu Sudan Pal Chowdhuary
1st Lane, Howrah.------------------- -----------------------Opposite Parties.
P R E S E N T
1. Hon’ble President : Shri J. N. Ray.
2. Hon’ble Member : Dr. Dilip Kr. Chakraborty.
3. Hon’ble Member : Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya.
C O U N S E L
Representatives for the Complainant : Shri Arun Das ( since deceased ),
Sk. Md. Giyasuddin
Ld. Advocates.
Representatives for the O.P. no. 1 : Shri Debasis Chatterjee,
Mr. Pradip Kumar Bhowmick,
Smt. Lakshmi Chowdhury,
Ld. Advocates.
Representatives for the O.P. no. 2 : Shri Ashis Kumar Dinda,
Sk. Emdadul Haque,
Ld. Advocates.
F I N A L O R D E R
This is to consider an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 praying for an order of installation of new electric connection on the ground of deficiency in service.
Fact of the case, in brief, is that the complainant is a tenant under the O.P. no. 2 in respect of the tenanted room situated at 40/1, Madhusudan Pal Chowdhury 1st Lane, P.S Bantra, District - Howrah. The complainant is suffering serious and acute disease. For this reason and to lead a normal civil life electricity urgently required by her. The complainant requested the O.P no. 2 to supply electricity but O.P no. 2 failed and neglected to do so. Therefore, the complainant filed an application for new electric connection ( domestic ) to CESC Ltd. and as such CESC Ltd. inspected the site and thereafter directed to deposit earnest money and security deposit by their letter dt. 29th March, 2010. Accordingly the complainant deposited the money 03-04-2010. Thereafter on 21-05-2010 the men of CESC Ltd went to install the electric meter in favour of the complainant but could not do so due to objection raised by O.P. no. 2. Under this circumstances the complainant prays for electric connection and cost of the suit and other reliefs. Hence the application.
O.P. nos. 1 & 2 contested the case by filing two separate written versions.
Contention of o.ps. no. 1 interalia is that on receipt of application ( vide M.R. No. 06/04769/10 ) from the complainant for installation of the electric connection proper inspection was made on 27-03-2010 and then it was observed that the complainant being a tenant wants electric supply by separate meter for her occupied portion. During the said inspection objection was raised by one person stated to be landlord of the premises. However, offer for separate metered supply at the existing meter board position was sent on 29-03-2010 with MASD Bill. After payment of MASD Bill and compliance of other formalities the men of CESC went to install the electric meter but could not do so due to objection raised by O.P. no. 2. Subsequently on 30-03-2010 the company received an objection letter from Ram Awtar Kumar, O.P. no.2 in the instant case, and the company sent the letters dt. 05-04-2010 to the applicant as well as the objector for elucidation and remarks but no reply from either side is available till date. It may be mentioned herein that the objector Ram Awtar Kumar has also filed a petition in the Ex. Magistrate’s Court as Misc. Petition No. 540 of 2010 wherein I/C Bantra P.S. has been asked to file a report. However, the company again tried to install the meter on 21-10-2010 but could not do so due to objection raised by the landlord. The counsel for the O.P. no. 2 further argued that they have no objection to give the electric supply but the instant case is the outcome of difference and disputes in between the complainant and landlord, O.P. no. 2. There is no deficiency on the part of O.P. no. 1 Therefore, O.P. no. 1 prays for rejection of the instant case and / or to pass any order which the Forum may deem fit and proper.
In the written version o.p. no. 2, Ram Awtar Kumar, has denied all the materials facts. He has stated in his written version that the complainant is suppressing the material facts and also misleading the ld. Forum .She is not entitled to get any order for installation of new electric meter. It is also stated that the complainant is not paying rent regularly. But the counsel for O.P. no. 2 has stated that the complainant resides at that premises . The complainant has no legal right to take any permission from the Ld. Forum for installation of new electric meter within the purview of Section 34 of W.B.P.T. Act amended in the year 2002. O.P. no. 2 is not the sole landlord of the complainant. It is also submitted that one Joydeb Dey previously filed one title suit against the O.P. no. 2 and his brother before the Ld. 4th Civil Judge ( Jr. Division ), at Howrah, being T.S. No. 130 / 1978 and the Ld. Civil Court directing the parties to maintain statuesque as regard to the nature and character of the suit property vide order no. 259 dated 24-01-2006. In this circumstances the instant case is liable to be dismissed.
In view of the pleading of the parties following points arose for determination :
1) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the o.p. no. 1, CESC Ltd. ?
2) Is the complainant entitled to get an order in terms of Section 14 of the C.P. Act, 1986 ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
Both the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience of
discussion and for brevity.
Fact remains that the complainant applied for electric connection on 15-03-2010 in her tenanted premises and inspection was carried out by CESC Ltd. on 27-03-2010 and further the O.P. no.1 has sent a letter dt.29-03-2010 to the complainant offering separate metered supply at the existing meter board position with MASD bill . . Subsequently the O.P. no. 1 received an objection letter from O.P. no. 2 on 30-03-2010 and the CESC Ltd. sent the letter dated 05-04-2010 to the applicant as well as the objector for elucidation and remarks but no reply from either side has been received till date The complainant deposited the necessary charges i.e. MASD Bill and other charges on 03-04-2010. It is also admitted that CESC sent their men for installation of meter but could not do the same due to obstruction raised by o.p. no. 2.
The defence taken by o.p. no.2 is not acceptable. The documents speak that the complainant has applied for electricity and paid necessary charges. In his written version o.p. no. 2 has mentioned some problems with the complainant which are civil dispute. The Forum has no jurisdiction to pass any order regarding their civil dispute.
Upon hearing of the parties and on scrutiny of the papers on record along with annexure documents we find that instant application is praying for electric connection from o.p. nos. 1, CESC Ltd. They have conceded and submitted before us that they have no objection for installation of new electric connection in the premises of the complainant if free access is given to them. O.p. 1 CESC Ltd. also admitted that their men could not execute the job due to resistance of o.p,. no. 2. It is also admitted that the complainant resides at 40/1, Madhusudan Pal Chowdhury 1st Lane, P.S Bantra, District - Howrah. As per Electricity Act, the complainant being the occupier of the premises is entitled to get electric line from CESC Ltd. and she cannot be debarred from getting such relief. However, when the O.P. no. 1. CESC Ltd. have no objection then the prayer of the complainant must be considered. There is no merit of the objection raised by o.p. no. 2 who resisted the o.ps. no. 1. CESC Ltd. men for giving electric connection. But as per Electricity Act the prayer for installation of electric meter in the complainant’s room cannot be entertained. The complainant may get the electric connection by installing the separate meter from the existing meter board position.
As per the Electricity Act, 2003 Section 43 provides that o.p. nos. 1. CESC Ltd. can supply electricity at the premises on request made by the owner / occupier within one month from the receipt of the application. According to the law the complainant being an occupier of the premises is entitled to get the electric connection. The o.p. no.2 has no right to resist against the supply of electricity. All documents speak that complainant obviously resides at the premises for which the electric connection was prayed.
Now turning to the question of deficiency in service on the part of the o.p. nos. 1. CESC Ltd it appears that the men of the CESC Ltd went for installation of electric connection but due to the objection they could not install the same. They have informed it to the complainant properly and requested the complainant to inform them the date and time when the access to the meter board position will be made available to enable them to proceed further in the matter. But there is no evidence to show that o.ps. no. 1. CESC Ltd have taken any legal action against the said objector.
In this connection provision of Section 163 of the Electricity Act, 2003 may be referred to. According to the aforesaid Section the o.ps. no. 1. CESC Ltd should have taken legal action against the objector by approaching to the local police or by approaching to the local Executive Magistrate for necessary order regarding installation of the new service connection of the complainant. By not taking such legal action the o.ps. no. 1. CESC Ltd has committed deficiency in service.
Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case the Forum holds and concludes that the complainant is entitled to get appropriate order in terms of Section 14 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Points under consideration are accordingly decided.
In the result the application succeeds.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the consumer complaint is allowed on contest against o.p. nos. 1. CESC Ltd and dismissed against o.p. no. 2 but without cost.
The o.p. nos. 1, CESC Ltd. is directed to give electric connection by installing separate electric meter for the complainant within 30 days hereof.
In case of any illegal objection by any person complainant and o.p. nos. 1. CESC Ltd shall approach to the local police station for help.
O.p. nos. 1. CESC Ltd, in case of illegal objection, shall also take necessary action in terms of provision of 163 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
Supply the copy of the order to the parties, as per rule.
