This is a case for Electric connection and compensation.

The Complaint’s case in short is that complainant applied for Elec. Connection on 13.08.2004 at his residence in Plot No.1095 at Purba Swaraberia to the OP for which a quotation was issued to the complainant and the complainant paid the quotation money on 14.12.2004. In spite of that no Elec. Connection has been provided till date. The plot in question is a co-sharer property and the OP with the instruction of other co-sharer has not been given Elec. Connection to the complainant, so he applied for Elec. connection as well as compensation Rs.90,000/-.

                The OP contested the case by filing a written statement wherein he said that the case is not maintainable and also denied the material allegation of the case. The OP stated in his written statement that the quotation amount was received by the office of the OP on 14.12.2004. The Technical staff went to the premises on 18.05.2005 to effect new service connection, but the office failed to effect the said connection due to physical resistance by Shri Mrityunjoy Bera. An intimation regarding the difficulty in effecting service connection was sent to the Asstt. Director, Consumer Affairs. The 2^nd party may be able to effect service connection in the premises of Shri B. Bera after submission of way leave.

                Under the circumstances, the OP prays for dismissal of the complainant case with cost.

Points for decision

1. Is the case maintainable?
2. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of OP?
3. Is the complainant entitle to any relief as prayed for?

                                                                                                          Decision

Point No.1. It is admitted by the OP that the complainant deposited the quotation money, it can be said that the complainant is the consumer under the OP. Thus this point is disposed of in favor of the complainant

Point No.2. It is the case of the OP that he failed to give Elect. Connection to the complainant at his residence in Plot No.1095 due to obstruction by one Shri M. Bera, another co-sharer of the plot in question, so he claimed for way-leave. It is clear that after inspection, the OP issued quotation so certainly the way-leave is with the OP. The ext.1 R.O.R. clearly shows that the complainant is the co-sharer with plot in question. According to law every co-sharer have equal right in every inch of land in question. So one co-sharer cannot oppose in getting Elec. line to another co-sharer, as such the physical resistance by Shri M. Bera will not be considered favorably in his side and the complainant is entitled to have elec. line in his plot. Under the circumstances, we say that non-providing elec. Line to the complainant is deficiency in service on the part of the Elec. Deptt. This point is disposed of accordingly in favour of the complainant.

Point No.3 On the basis of the foregoing discussions and materials on record, we say that the complainant is entitled to have Elec. Connection and also compensation from the Elec. Deptt. for not providing the Elec. Connection to the complainant.

Hence,

                                                                                                        Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP with cost. The complainant is entitled to have Elec. Connection and compensation of Rs.5,000/- from the OP by one month from this date failing which the complainant is entitled to have the same by way of execution. The OP if requires may take proper held or police for such Elec. Connection in the house of the complainant. The OC/Kolaghat, P.S. is directed to provide the police help to the OP on his prayer.