C.F. CASE No.          : CC/09/31                                                                                                         

 

COMPLAINANT             :  Shankar Chandra Nag

S/O Late Nagendra Chandra Nag

Vill. Bethuadahari, Purbajagdanandapur,

Sahapur, Badal Dutta, Colony, 

P.O. Bethuadahri

Dist. Nadia.

 

 

       –  Vs  – 

 

 

OPPOSITE PARTY/OP         : Station Manager,

Bethuadahari Group Electric Supply

Vill. + P.O. Bethuadahari, P.S. Nakashipara 

Dist. Nadia 

 

 

PRESENT              :  SHRI DILIP KUMAR BASU                     PRESIDENT

             :  KUMAR MUKHOPADHYAY              MEMBER

             :  SMT SHIBANI BHATTACHARYA          MEMBER  

 

DATE OF DELIVERY             

OF  JUDGMENT               :    29th July, 2009.

 

 

:    J U D G M E N T    :

 

The fact of the complainant's case, in a nutshell, is as follows. 

The complainant, Shankar Chandra Nag has filed this case against the Station Manager, Bethuadahari Group Electric Supply, Bethuadahari, Nadia alleging that  he  is  the  consumer  having  No.  D020701,  Service  Connection No. A/D/9892, 

2

Meter No. (S 999999) under the OP.   Due to repairing of his house the electric connection was disconnected.  After completion of his house by repairing he prayed for reconnection of the same.  He submitted the complaint before Kalyani Circle Office on 23.10.08 wherefrom he obtained a reply intimating him for hearing of that petition on 28.11.08.  He also deposited Rs. 235/- as security charge.  After hearing on 28.11.08 the security charge of Rs. 235/- was waived and asked the OP to take step for giving electric connection to the complainant.   On 02.02.09 the complainant applied to the  OP for rendering electric connection at his house. On 16.02.09 he deposited Rs. 20/- as per direction of the OP as disconnection charge.   On 13.03.09 he again intimated the OP that his repairing work had been complicated and requested for giving electric connection.  Pursuant to the OP he also deposited Rs. 30/- as reconnection charge.  Pursuant to his application dtd 13.03.09 given to the OP, the OP has not given electric connection at his house till the date of filing of this case.  By filing the instant case he has prayed for a direction for rendering electric connection to his house, a compensation of Rs. 30,000/- for mental agony and harassment, cost and other relief.

The OP has contested this case by filing a written version whereon he has denied some material averment and has also admitted some points.   According to the OP the electric connection has been given to the house of the complainant on 10.06.09.   No harassment was caused to him.   Delay in giving electric connection is due to observation of official procedure.   Thus, there caused no deficiency in service and the case is liable to be dismissed.

 

In view of the above facts and circumstances the following points are taken for proper adjudication.

Point No.1:        Whether  there  caused  any  deficiency  in  service  on the part of the          OP?

3

Point No.2:        Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for?

 

FINDING WITH REASONS

 

Both the points are taken together for sake of convenience and for the purpose of avoiding needless repetitions. 

The Ld. Lawyer of the complainant has argued that it is fact that he has received electric connection on 10.06.09.  But the OP has rendered the electric connection to his premises after filing of this case.  He has lastly, requested the OP for giving electric connection to his premises on 13.03.09.  But the OP has not given the electric connection within a reasonable period.  After receiving of the notice of this case, on the same day of the receipt of the notice the electric connection was given.  Thus, the OP has obviously, caused deficiency in service and the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

The Ld. Lawyer of the OP has argued that it is fact that the complainant is a consumer under him.   It is also fact that the complainant deposited Rs. 235/-  as per quotation being the shifting charge of Rs. 185/-  and disconnection charge of Rs. 50/-.  He has also admitted that the Kalyani Circle Office has waived the deposited amount of Rs. 235/-.  It is also admitted fact that the complainant deposited Rs. 20/- on  19.02.09 as disconnection charge pursuant to the quotation dtd. 16.02.09.   It is also admitted fact that the complainant deposited Rs. 30/- as reconnection charge on 31.03.09.  Thereafter, on 10.06.09 the electric connection was given.  Thus according to him there caused no deficiency in service and the case may be dismissed. 

He has further submitted that a caution may be given to the OP for giving  electric connection late.  

The complainant has filed each and every document in support of his contention.     It  is  admitted  fact  that  the  complainant  by  a  letter  dtd.  13.03.09 

4

requested the OP that his repairing work has been completed and requested for rendering electric connection to his premises.  It is also admitted fact that the complainant deposited Rs. 30/- on 31.03.09 for reconnection charge.  After receiving the reconnection charge on 31.03.2009 the electric connection was given on 10.06.09.  This case was filed on 29.05.09 

The A/D card transpires that the OP received the notice of this case on 10.06.09.  This seems that after receipt of the notice of this case the OP has given electric connection at the premises of the complainant.   There is no cogent explanation on receipt of reconnection charge on 31.03.2009 why the connection was given on 10.06.09.  

Now-a-days electricity is essential in each and every family.  Besides it is difficult to expend days without electricity who is habituated the use of electricity.  The complainant was most vigil to get the electric connection at his premises and he has knocked in each corner for getting electric connection.  He went to the Kalyani Circle Office as per that office direction and also the office of the OP.   In spite of that he has obtained the electric connection after lapse of a considerable period for which the OP has no cogent explanation. 

In view of the above facts we find deficiency in service on the part of the OP.  

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of opinion that the complainant is entitled to get compensation for his agony and harassment.    In our considered view if Rs. 3,000/- is given to the complainant as compensation then that may mitigate his grievance.   

The case thus succeeds.

Hence,

Ordered,

That  the  case  is  allowed  on  contest with cost of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one 

5

thousand) only.

It is further ordered that the OP to pay the complainant the sum of Rs. 3,000/-  (Rupees three thousand) only as compensation.

As the electric connection has already been rendered to the house of the complainant, we pass no order as to that matter. 

Thus, the OP do pay Rs. 1,000/- as cost and Rs. 3,000/- as compensation in all Rs. 4000/- (Rupees four thousand) only within 40 days from the date of this order failing which the amount shall accrue interest @ 9% per annum from this day till making payment the entire amount. 

The complainant do receive the above cited sum from the OP within the stipulated period mentioned above.  

 

Hand over a copy of this order to the parties free of cost.

The case is disposed of by 1 months 10 days.

 

Dictated & corrected by me.

 

 

   (D.K. Basu)

     President         

C.D.R.F., Nadia

(K. Mukhopadhyay)        (S. Bhattacharya)            (D.K. Basu)

          Member               Member                     President            

                     C.D.R.F., Nadia        C.D.R.F., Nadia       C.D.R.F., Nadia