04-09-2015

HON’BLE MR. DEBASIS BHATTACHARYA, PRESIDING MEMBER

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order dated 30-07-2014 passed by the Ld. District Forum, South 24 Parganas in Case No.77/2014, the OP thereof has preferred this appeal. By the impugned order, the Ld. District Forum has allowed the case on contest against the OP with directions to the OP to provide electrical connection in the schedule premises within 7 days and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation and also a penalty of Rs.2 lac.

The case of the Complainant is that he is a transferee/owner of the case property on purchase from M/s. Shyamal Bag and Amal Bag. But, at the material time of purchase, there was no electrical connection/meter standing in the name of the transferor/occupier. He has been residing there with the members of his family without any electrical connection. Accordingly, he applied for installation of a new electrical connection/meter in his name to the OP, on payment of necessary charges/fees/application money, which was subsequently inspected by the OP. Lastly, by a letter dated 12-04-2013, the OP informed the Complainant that there is an outstanding dues of Rs.14,870/-, as consumed by the previous occupier, Mr. Shyamal Bag and that they are unable to provide any electrical connection at the schedule premises until and unless the said amount is paid/cleared. OP in order to shield its own mistake of not demanding the payment of such dues from the previous occupier, has now been demanding the same from the Complainant. Accordingly, the case.

On the other hand, the case of the OP is that the Complainant was informed vide letters dated 14-01-2013 as well as 12-04-2013 for deposition of the outstanding dues of Rs.14,870/-, lying in the name of the erstwhile consumer, Mr. Shyamal Bag, which was disconnected on 27-01-2004.  The amount of Rs.23,184/- lied as outstanding dues, which comes to Rs.14,870/- after adjustment of security deposit. In such facts and circumstances, the complaint be dismissed.

It is to be considered if the impugned order has anything to be interfered with as regards the facts of the case and position of law.

Decision with reasons

Ld. Advocate for the Appellant has submitted that there has been an outstanding amount lying in respect of the schedule premises, which was in respect of the erstwhile owner, from whom the Complainant purchased the property. He has raised a question of propriety as the vendor has to pay outstanding tax and rent of his vendor, for the purpose of mutation, then why not the outstanding electric  charges of the vendor. He has relied on two decisions of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in MAT No.1329/2010/CAN No.9172/2010 and MAT No.178/2010/CAN No.1034/2010.

Ld. Advocate for the Respondent, however, has submitted that there was no whisper as to outstanding dues when he applied for his electric connection and the necessary charges paid. There has been no nexus of relationship of the Complainant with his vendor. He has relied upon four decisions of the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir, Andhra Pradesh, Nagpur and Patna, being respectively reported in AIR 1987  J&K 71, AIR 1986 AP 52, AIR 1938 Nagpur 156 and AIR 1985 Patna 187.

In fact, no nexus between the Complainant and his vendor in the matter could be established by the OP, which exclusively lies on this licensee, as per Regulation 3.4.2 of the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission (Standards of Performance of Distribution Licensee Relating to Consumers Services) Regulation, 2005. Further, the disconnection of the previous occupier was made on 27-01-2004, whereas the Complainant purchased the property by a sale deed registered on 23-04-2009, having no proximity between the two events. So, the Complainant is within his right to claim new electric connection from the OP in the schedule premises purchased by him. So, the impugned order is to be upheld, but for the largesse of compensatory amount of Rs.50,000/- and the penalty amount of Rs.2 lac imposed upon the OP. The compensation is reduced and fixed at Rs.10,000/, while the penalty amount is struck off.

Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

That the appeal be and the same is allowed in part on contest against the Respondent. The impugned order is modified to the extent that Rs.10,000/- is to be paid as compensation, and the penalty amount is dispensed with. Other parts of the odering portion will stand as they are.