(Per Mr.P.N.Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member)
(1) This is an appeal filed by M.S.E.B., Urban Division, Nashik against the order passed by the District Forum, Nashik in Consumer Complaint No.09/2003 decided on 20/03/2004. The forum below allowed the complaint of the complainant who is tenant and directed MSEB to give new electricity connection to the complainant if the complainant makes all the compliance except the payment of dues and also directed MSEB not to insist to procure NOC from the landlord. Aggrieved by this order, the opponent filed this appeal. The facts are that the complaint is an occuping tenancy premises owned by Mohmad Iliys Mohmad Salim, the landlord. After the death of said landlord, his two sons insisted the complainant to vacate the premises, the stopped paying electricity bill. The complainant and other tenants paid dues of `15,000/- on 13/10/2000 and requested MSEB to re-supply electricity. The MSEB contended that the said premises is still having more arrears to be paid and therefore denied to give re-connection to their premises. The MSEB also directed the complainant to procure no objection certificate from the landlord. Under these circumstances, the complainant filed consumer complaint against the MSEB. MSEB did not file reply; hence the forum below proceeded ex-parte against it.
(2) The forum below, therefore, relying on documents and affidavit of the complainant held that non-payment of electricity dues, the complainant was not responsible and the forum below also directed to MSEB not to insist for NOC from the landlord since relations between the landlord and tenants were streched. As such the forum allowed the complaint partly and directed MSEB not to recover arrears from the tenant and if they comply with rest of conditions, they be give new connection. Aggrieved by this order, the opponent MSEB filed this appeal.
(3) There is a delay in filing the appeal. It appears that the appellant is govt. organization and officers from the govt. organization has to take sanction from their higher authority. In the said process, there is delay. The delay is properly explained. We condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merits.
(4) This appeal is lying unattended from 2004. The appellant also has not bothered to take circulation for getting first order passed. Therefore, on 02/08/2011, this matter was taken from sine-die list and placed before us for disposal. Intimation of that date was displayed on notice board and published on internet Board of the Commission. On 02/08/2011, on finding that appellant as well as the respondent are absent, we directed office to issue notice informing next date of hearing i.e. 23/09/2011 to both the parties. Accordingly, on 16/08/2011, office issued notices to the parties. On 23/09/2011 i.e. today, the appellant as well as the respondent were absent. Therefore, we are deciding the matter on merit. We perused the impugned order. We are finding that the observations in the order passed by the district forum are wrong in as much as the district forum erroneously directed MSEB not to recover outstanding dues from the complainant. For the energy supplied to the complainant and others in the premises they have to pay electricity charges. If there are arrears of the premises then occupiers or next occupants of the said premises is duty bound to clear dues and thereafter new connection can be obtained. If the premises are having arrears, the person has to pay charges asked for new connection after paying earlier dues. Of course, the forum below rightly held that the appellant should not insist for the NOC from the respondent. NOC of the landlord cannot be asked for because relations between landlord and tenants are always strained. The landlords avoided making payment of electricity charges and to put the tenants into difficulty and inconvenience with a view to compel them to vacate the premises. While we direct that the order of the forum below asking MSEB not to recover dues itself is bad in law. But we hold that the forum has rightly directed the MSEB not to insist NOC from the landlord, if the complaint makes rest of the compliance. The forum directed that the complainant should be given new connection without NOC from the landlord. We hold that the MSEB is entitled to recover the arrears from the complainant when he applies for re-connection or new connection. Under the circumstances, we pass the following order.
ORDER
(1) Delay is condoned.
(2) Appeal is partly allowed.
(3) We delete the sentence from the impugned order that MSEB not to recover arrears of electricity supply bill from the complainant. The rest of the order stands confirmed.
(4) Inform the parties accordingly.
Pronounced on 23rd September, 2011.
