DATE OF FILING : 01.10.2013.
DATE OF S/R : 06.03.2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 13.10.2015.
Gora Mukherjee,
son of late Partha Pratim Mukherjee,
residing at 348, Netaji Subhas Road,
P.S. & District Howrah………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.
1. Indranil Mukherjee,
son of late Partha Pratim Mukherjee,
2. Anubha Mukherjee,
wife of late Partha Pratim Mukhrejee,
both of 348, Netaji Subhas Road,
P.S. & District Howrah,
PIN 711101.
3. The District Engineer,
CESC Ltd.,
433/1, G.T. Road ( N ), P.S. Golabari,
District Howrah,
PIN 711101.
4. CESC Ltd.,
having its office at
433/1, G.T. Road ( N ), P.S. Golabari,
District Howrah,
PIN 711101. …...………………………………………...…OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak .
F I N A L O R D E R
- This is an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by petitioner, Gora Mukherjee, praying for direction upon the o.p. nos. 3 & 4, CESC Ltd., Howrah Regional Office, Howrah, to install new electric connection in the premises of the petitioner and also direct the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 not to cause any obstruction at the time of rendering such electric connection.
- The case of the petitioner is that he is a co owner of o.p. nos. 1 & 2 in the holding no. 348, N.S. Road, P.S. Howrah. He applied for new electric connection before the CESC Ltd. on 07.08.2013 and deposited earnest money. But the o.p. nos. 3 & 4, CESC Ltd. failed to carry out the inspection at the premises of complainant as the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 obstructed them. Electricity being an essential part of human life and so the petitioner filed this case.
- The o.p. nos. 3 & 4, CESC Ltd., contested the case by filing a written version stating that the case is not maintainable and also denied the allegations made against them and submitted that they are ready and willing to render electricity to the petitioner but due to obstruction they failed and the petitioner failed to protect them and thus they prayed for dismissal of the case.
- The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 being the co owner of the petitioner submitted that the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 are the absolute owner of the property and the petitioner has no right, title and interest over the property and so the case filed by the petitioner be dismissed.
- Upon pleadings of parties the following points arose for determination :
- Is the case maintainable in its present form ?
- Whether the petitioner has any cause of action to file the case ?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.,CESC Ltd. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- All the issues aretaken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity for discussion and to skip of reiteration. In support of his case the petitioner filed affidavit in chief as well as relevant documents showing his eagerness for such connection. The o.p. nos. 3 & 4, CESC Ltd., also conceded that they got the fees but while rendering connection they were obstructed by the relations of the petitioner and so they failed to give connection. ThisForum heard the counsels of all the parties and finds that the o.p. nos. 3 & 4 due to obstruction failed to render fresh electric connection to the petitioner and thus there is no latches on their part as could be noticed here. As the o.p. nos. 3 & 4 are willing to give connection so they would be directed to provide fresh connection to the petitioner and both the petitioner as well as o.p. nos. 3 & 4 would apply before the local police station if further obstruction is made.In support of his case the petitionerfiled before thisForum documents like deposit of earnest money, copy of GDE and the letter of the CESC Authority written to him in the address of the petitioner and the same proved the fact that the petitioner has been residing at 348, Netaji SubhasRoad, P.S. & District Howrah, wherein he prayed for fresh electric connection. There is no denying the fact that even an occupier can apply for electricity whether his occupancy is disputed and it is fact here that the petitioner Gora Mukherjee resides at 348, Netaji Subhas Road, P.S. & District Howrah, even if he is not the owner of the property or neither tenant nor a licensee and he is entitled to electric connection.
In the result, the claim case succeeds.
Court fee paid is correct.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 347 of 2013 ( HDF 347 of 2013 ) be and the same is allowed on contest against the o.ps. without costs.
The petitioner is entitled to fresh electric connection in his occupied premises and the CESC Ltd. is directed to render such fresh electric connection in the premises of the petitioner within 30 days from the date of this order and in case of any obstruction the CESC Ltd. will be at liberty to take the help of the local police. The o.p. nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4, CESC Ltd., are to do the job within 30 days from the date of this order failing the petitioner would be at liberty to put the order in execution after expiry of the appeal period.
No order is passed as to compensation and cost as no latches found in respect of the electric authority.
. Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( B. D. Nanda )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
