Jane Alam alias Jane Alam  Ansari,

son of Wahid Hussain,

residing at 81, Jaya Bibi Lane,

P.O.  Ghusuri,  P.S. Belur,

District – Howrah..-------------------------------------------------------------  COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.         The CESC Ltd.,

having its head office

Victoria House, Chowrangi Square,

Kolkata – 700001.

2.         The  District  Engineer,

The CESC Ltd., having its Regional Office

at 433/1,  G.T. Road ( North ), P.S . Golabari,

District – Howrah,

PIN – 711101.

3.         Fakhrunnessa Bibi,

wife of late Janaluddin,

residing at 81, Jaya Bibi Lane,

P.O.  Ghurusi, P.S. Belur,

District – Howrah.-------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                                P    R    E     S    E    N     T

President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

Member      :      Shri P.K. Chatterjee.

      Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.     

                                                 F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1.                  The instant case was  filed by complainant   U/S 12 of the  C.P.  Act, 1986,

as amended against the O.P. nos. 1 & 2   alleging deficiency in service U/S 2( 1 )( g ),  2( 1 )( o ) of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has prayed for passing necessary directives upon the O.P. nos. 1 & 2, CESC Authority  for immediate installation of new meter at the complainant’s desired premises being no. 81/3, Jaya Bibi  Road, Howrah, in spite of the facts that he is residing as a tenant at 81, Jaya Bibi Lane, P.O. Ghusuri, P.S. Belur, District – Howrah and to restrain o.p. no. 3 from raising any obstruction against such installation.

2.                  The o.p. nos.1 &  2 , CESC Authority stated in their written version that

the complainant paid MASD Bill  of Rs. 790/- and that to attempts were made for effecting new electric connection through   meter at the premises of 81/3, Jaya Bibi Road. In spite of the facts he is residing as a tenant to some other location and  the job could not be completed for forcible and unauthorized objection raised at the site by o.p. no. 3 namely  Fakhrunnessa Bibi. They have no objection for installing the same if free access is available.

3.                  The o.p. no. 3 appeared on 26-09-2013 before the Forum  without

submission of any written version for which ex parte made against him/her.

4.         Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. i.e.,CESC Ltd. ?

ii)                  Whether the complainant is  entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5.         Both the points are  taken up together for active consideration. It is admitted facts that the complainant complied with all necessary technical formalities together with depositing necessary quotational money  to the o.p. nos. 1 & 2, CESC Authority at the schedule premises on demand which differs from the existing portion as a tenant. It appears that the o.p. nos. 1& 2  being  public utility concern is eager to cater the service to the intending consumer i.e. complainant at his schedule premises. There is no deficiency in service on their part and nor did they commit any unfair trade practice. Their inability to install the meter was due to the objection raised by the o.p. no. 3. But the fact remains is that as  the present situation, the   consumer cannot be deprived from electricity, nor can be  forced to live in darkness when all the formalities including MASD Bill paid by him. The objection raised by the o.p. no. 3 cannot be sustained at the present situation on some fictitious considering   electricity is a need based requirement of  a civilized person.

6.         Considering the above we have our considered opinion that the o.p., CESC Authority  has no latches and negligence in installing the meter in question and that to they are ready to complete the job if free access is available at the proposed premises where quotational money was deposited by the complainant  .

            Therefore, we are of the view that this is a fit case where prayer of the complainant shall be allowed.      

      Points under consideration are accordingly decided.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 272 of 2013 ( HDF 272 of 2013 )  be  allowed on contest without   costs  against  O.P. nos. 1 & 2, CESC Authority and dismissed without cost against o.p. no. 3.   

      The O.P. nos. 1 & 2, CESC Authority  be directed to provide new electric connection through separate meter to the complainant at 81/3, Jaya Bibi Road, Howrah, where quotation amount was deposited within 30 days from the date of this order.  

      The o.p. no. 3 is hereby restrained from causing any disturbance during installation  of the meter.

      In case of any illegal objection raised by any person, complainant and o.p. nos. 1 & 2, CESC Authority shall approach to the local police station for help.

      No order as to compensation.

      The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.      

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (   P. K. Chatterjee )                                                         

  Member,  C.D.R.F.,Howrah.