Circuit Bench Siliguri

StateCommission

A/18/2018

THE STATION MANAGER - Complainant(s)

Versus

SRI RAMANI BALA - Opp.Party(s)

SUDIP BHATTACHARYA,TAPES CH.BHATTACHARYA

14 Aug 2019

ORDER

SILIGURI CIRCUIT BENCH
of
WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
2nd MILE, SEVOKE ROAD, SILIGURI
JALPAIGURI - 734001
 
First Appeal No. A/18/2018
( Date of Filing : 04 Sep 2018 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 27/06/2018 in Case No. cc/06/2018 of District Dakshin Dinajpur)
 
1. THE STATION MANAGER
CCC KUMARGANJ,W.B.S.E.D.CO. LTD.,PO-MAHIPUR,PS.KUMARGANJ,733141
DAKSHIN DINAJPUR
WB
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. SRI RAMANI BALA
S/O LATE RAMESH BALA,VILLAGE & PO -ANGINA,PS-KUMARGANJ,733141
DAKSHIN DINAJPUR
wb
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Subhendu Bhattacharya PRESIDING MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
For the Respondent:
Dated : 14 Aug 2019
Final Order / Judgement

This appeal is directed against the judgment and final order dated 27/6/2018 delivered by Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Dakshin Dinajpur in CC no. 6 of 2018. The fact of the case in nut shell is that the respondent of this appeal Ramani Bala, a poor farmer, has applied for an electrical STW connection in his filed in the year 2012 and in response to his application, the WBSCDCL has issued a quotation, asking him to deposit rupees 6289 for said electrical connection. The complainant deposited the said quotation money on 30/9/2013 and in spite of such quotation money, the concerned company could not provide the electricity connection which the complainant sought for. He visited the electricity office in various occasions and requested the authorities as he was suffering the problems of cultivations due to lack of electricity. Ultimately, he came to the Ld. Forum with an approach to get some reliefs. The Ld. Forum has provided legal aid to the poor agriculturist and admitted the complaint and asked the electricity authority to contest the case by filing WV. The electricity authority has contested the case by filing WV and denied all the averments of the complainant and contended that after receiving the quotation money, the men of electricity visited and inspected the place and found that the meter room was not prepared on the part of the complainant for which the electricity authority could not supply electric line and instructed the complainant to complete the meter room for STW connection. The complainant had failed to provide the proper meter room for which the order issued by the electricity authority, could not be executed by its contractor.

Subsequently, the complainant has shifted the place for a connection which was 100 meters away from the previous place and for that reason, two numbers of 8 PCC was required to be installed and the work was completed on 13/2/2018 vide meter no. LX001528. After hearing both sides, Ld. Forum came to the finding that there was gross arbitrary negligence on the part of the electricity authority and for that reason, the electricity was directed to cause immediation installation of STW connection in the site of the complainant within 15 days and to pay compensation of rupees 30000 and litigation cost of rupees 6000 to the complainant from the end of the Electricity Authority. Being aggrieved with the said order this appeal follows on the ground that the Ld. Forum has failed to appreciate the evidence and misapplied provisions of law and order of Ld. Forum suffered from irregularity and liable to be set aside. The appeal was admitted on its merit and the notice was issued upon the respondent/complainant who has contested the appeal through the Ld. Advocate provided to him from the part of legal aid service authority. The appeal, was heard in presence of Ld. Advocate of both sides.

D e c i s i o n     w i t h    r e a s o n s

Admitted position is that the complainant is a poor farmer who has to maintain his family with the income of agriculture from his meagre agriculture land which has no irrigation facilities. For that reason, he intended to watering the field through shallow machine and for that reason, the STW connection was urgently required and for that purpose, he has deposited the quotation money in the year 2013. But the concerned department of electricity could not execute the work of installation of the electricity in spite of repeated demand on the part of the complainant. It is argued on the part of the Ld. Advocate of the appellant that after receiving the quotation money, the men of electricity went to the spot and found that the meter room was not ready for installation and subsequently the complainant has shifted the place of installation which was 100 meter away from the previous spot for which he paid the quotation money and for that reason, the extra expenditure was borne by the electricity for installation of the electric line which has already completed and the complainant is enjoying electricity for watering his paddy land. The compensation awarded in favour of the complainant is not appropriate in this case as because there were no latches on the part of the electricity authority. Ld. Advocate of the respondent counters this argument to the effect that there was procedural delays on the part of the appellant company as the contractor who was entrusted to execute the work order, could not complete the work in due time and the electricity authority was not vigilant whether the work was completed by the contractor in due time or not. Negligent on the part of the electricity authority is well established in this case.

After hearing both sides, the commission finds that the problem of the complainant has already solved and he is enjoying the electricity in his land and the order of Ld. Forum has already executed by the appellant company. So, the complainant is not suffering any harassment right now. However, he had waited a long year for getting electricity in his land and the Forum only awarded compensation in his favour of rupees 30,000 which is not enough for a big company like WBSCDCL.

However, on the other hand, there was no serious fault on the part of the Electricity Authority as because they had to depend upon the performance of the contractor who could not execute the work in proper time.

For the ends of justice, the amount as awarded rupees 30,000 as compensation by the Ld. Forum should be reduced to rupees 20,000. The litigation cost awarded in favour of the complainant is not justified one as because the complainant was provided legal help form the side of the Government to conduct his case and for that reason, he is not entitled to get litigation cost in this case further.

Hence, it is,

O r d e r e d,

That the appeal be and the same is hereby partly allowed on contest without any cost. The final order of Ld. Forum is hereby modified to the extent that the amount of rupees 30,000 which was directed to pay by the appellant company to the respondent to be read as rupees 20,000 and the litigation cost imposed upon the appellant company is hereby rescinded.

Let the order be supplied to the concern parties free of cost and also to be sent to the Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Dakshin Dinajpur by e-mail.

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Subhendu Bhattacharya]
PRESIDING MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.