West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/18/2013

Sri Tapan Ghosh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Station Manager, Chandrakona Gr. Electric Supply, WBSEDCL - Opp.Party(s)

21 Jan 2014

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

 

 Complaint case No.18/2013                                                         Date of disposal: 21/01/2014                               

 BEFORE : THE HON’BLE PRESIDENT :  Mr. Sujit Kumar Das.

                                                      MEMBER :  Mrs. Debi Sengupta.

                                                      MEMBER :  Mr. Kapot Chattopadhyay.

    For the Complainant/Petitioner/Plaintiff : Mr. A. K. Dutta, Advocate.

    For the Defendant/O.P.S.                           : Mr. S. K. Bhattacharya, Advocate.

          

                  Sri Tapan Ghosh, S/o late Santosh Ghosh, Vill & P.O.-Keageria, P.S.-Chandrakona,

                  Dist-Paschim Medinipur………………Complainant.

                                                              Vs.

1. Station Manager, Chandrakona Gr. Electric Supply, WBSEDCL, at Chandrakona Town, P.O. & P.S.-Chandrakona, Dist-Paschim Medinipur
2. Zonal Manager, Midnapore Zonal Office, WBSEDCL, Station Road, P.O. & P.S.-Midnapore, Dist-Paschim Medinipur ………………Ops.

 

                  Case of the complainant Sri Tapan Ghosh, in short, is that he deposited the quotation money to the amount of `.19,913/- (Nineteen thousand nine hundred thirteen) only on 1/3/10, vide service connection no.NNP/B/6172. Before Execution of the new service connection from the end of the Op, the complainant received the said connection under the scheme of Rajiv Gandhi Gram Bikash Yozana and thereby the quotation money has not been utilized.  Stating the incident, the complainant on 06/07/2010 claimed refund of the quotation money but the Op. has not made any payment.

                 The Op. contested the case by filing written objection stating therein that the complainant has no cause of action to raise the plea of deficiency in service against them on the issue of getting refund of money with interest and litigation cost of 10,000/- (Ten thousand) only for harassment on the ground that the Op has already made an intimation to the complainant for acceptance of the bank cheque bearing the quotation amount from their office.  But the complainant did not accept the same.  Rather, he tried to mislead the Forum by means of a designed petition of complaint.

                 In respect of case of both parties, the following issues are very much relevant for discussion in order to arrive at a correct decision on the dispute.

Contd……………..P/2

 

- ( 2 ) -

 Issues :-

1. Whether the case is maintainable in its present form?
2. Whether there is any deficiency of service against the Op?
3. Is there any cause of action for filing this case?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for?

Decision with reasons :

Issue Nos.1 to 4:-

                 All the issues are taken up together for discussion as those are interlinked each other.

                 Ld. Advocate for the complainant made his argument that it is a clear case of bonafide compensation of the complainant on the issue  of refund of his money on  account of getting new electricity connection   The complainant has deposited the quotation money but before irrection of the line, the complainant obtained the same by virtue of Rajiv Gandhi Gram Bikash Yojana which being a Government scheme for extension of electricity line in the village.  In that event the quotation money stands useless and the same should be returned alongwith interest in favour of the complainant.  But from 6/7/2010 the Op kept the money with them unnecessarily without refund of the same to the complainant.  Upon the case it is made clear before the Forum that the complainant is entitled to get refund of the quotation money 19,913/- (Nineteen thousand nine hundred thirteen) only with accrued interest with effect from 1/3/10.

                 Ld. Advocate for the OP. has, in the very beginning of his argument, pointed out an information in a document in Xerox copy showing that the complainant has already received the permissible amount of 18,949/- (Eighteen thousand nine hundred forty nine) only with a declaration  made on 06/05/13 by the complainant Tapan Ghosh that upon such receipt of the money there shall be no claim against the Op.  In this connection, Ld. Advocate submitted that there is no valid ground for holding the allegation of deficiency in service against the Op. and as such the case should be dismissed.

                  In reply, Ld. Advocate for the complainant submitted that the Op remained silent from 27/05/10 when the complainant claimed for refund of money stating the ground as made in the application dated 27/05/10 submitted before the Op.  But after presentation of the petition of complaint before the Forum, the prayer dated 27/5/10 has been considered.  So for such delay the complainant is entitled to get accrued interest on the quotation amount that he had deposited before the Op Chandrakona Group Electric supply.  Thus, according to the Ld. Advocate the complainant has sufficient cause of action in favour of granting prayer as made by the complainant here in this case.

                  Considering the facts and circumstances, it appears that there is no strong reason for delaying in making refund of the money despite having a prayer made by the complainant on

Contd……………..P/3

 

 

- ( 3 ) -

27/5/10 before them.  In view of the fact, the complainant should get at least interest for the delay period in giving refund of the permissible amount after deduction of incidental costs out of the total quotation money. 

                  Thus, all the issues on hold in part in favour of the complainant. 

                   Hence

                              It is ordered

                                                  that the case be and the same is allowed in part on contest in favour of the complainant.

                   The complainant is entitled to get interest–amount at the rate of 10% on the permissible sum of 18,949/- (Eighteen thousand  nine hundred forty nine) only w.e.f. 6.7.10 till the date of presentation of the complaint-petition.  In default, the complainant shall get further interest at the same rate till realization.   

 

 Dic.& corrected by me

 

         President                              Member                Member                           President

                                                                                                                        District forum

                                                                                                                    Paschim Medinipur