Complainant is present. Today is fixed for argument and BNA by Ops. But the OP submitted an application for adjournment. On repeated calls nobody is found present nor moved for adjournment .
Objection raised by the complainant in respect of the adjournment petition stating that it is the habit of the OP to remain not present in order to contest the case. We have considered the petition for adjournment on the ground of the illness of the op. There is no acceptable evidence to consider the ground as stated in the petition for adjournment. Thus, the prayer for adjournment stands refused. Parties are to get ready for argument in terms of the earlier order.
Heard argument. Accordingly, order /judgment follows as under.
Case of the complainant in short is that application for commercial connection for supply of electricity was made with payment of requisite security deposit and service charges amounting to Rs.2010/- on 22.7.2013 . Inspite of that no service connection has been given effect to despite repeated persuasion even by service of notice dated 24.6.2013. Ultimately the complainant has come before us with the prayer for giving direction to the oP for new electric connection to the premises no. 3/13 Haran Banerje Lane, Konnagar , Dist. Hooghly with compensation and litigation cost amounting to Rs.10,000/-. In this connection, the complainant has submitted relevant documents viz. payment receipt dated 22.7.2013, application dated 24.6.2013 to support his claim.
Op contested the case by filing WV challenging that the case is not maintainable for want of valid ground and as suc the case should be dismissed.
Upon the case of the both parties the following issues are frame.
Whether the case is maintainable for want of cause of action ?
If the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
Upon careful consideration of the case supported by the relevant documents it appears that there is not dispute as regard to the prayer for procuring new electric connection to the premises of the complainant as disclosed in his petition of complaint and the payment of reqiosote security deposit and service charges. Under such facts and circumstances we do not find any valid ground for delaying the service pf supply of electricity to the complainant inspite of having received of the requisite payment long back in the year 2013. This act of negligence on part of the OP CESC should not be encouraged and as such the prayer is bona fide and the same should allowd with direction for immediate supply of electricity to the complainant in furtherance of his business for his livelihood.
Thus, it is held and decided that the issues ar dispose of in favour of the complainant.
Hence ordered
That the case be and the same is allowed on contest without cost.
The complainant is entitled to get electricity with compensatin of Rs.1000/-.
The OP CESC is hereby directed to take immediate steps for supply of electricity to the complainant at his premises within 20 days from the date of this order.
Let a copy of this order be made over to the parties free of cost.
