The complainant has come up with the instant case with a prayer for direction upon the OP for effecting electric connection in his house situated at plot no. 1466 of Mouza – Tajpur, Dist. – Purba Medinipur, for which he already applied before the OP for such service connection and as per their instruction he deposited House SC Charge for Rs.200/- on 29.04.2011 as also Security money for Rs.246/- on the same day. But, inspite of his several request the OP did not give the aforesaid service connection in his house, without any reason.

          The OP contested the case by filing W/V denying all material allegations made against them. That apart, it is stated that though the OP tried to give connection of electricity to the house of the complainant, they could not do so, for one Mayarani Hazra, W/o Sumanomoy Hazra, raised objection for not effecting the service connection with reason that she is a co-sharer of the plot in question.

Point for consideration

          Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for?

Decision with reason

          There is no dispute that the complainant is a ‘consumer’ under the OP.

          It is contended on behalf of the complainant that even after deposit of House SC Charge for Rs.200/- as also Security money for Rs.246/- on the basis of the quotation issued by the OP, they did not give the aforesaid service connection in his house despite of several request made by the complainant to the OP.

On the other hand, the grievance of the OP is that they were ready to give the service connection but could not give effect to such connection as one Mayarani Hazra, W/o Sumanomoy Hazra, raised objection through her Advocate’s letter that she is a co-sharer of the land in plot no. 1466 and that the case is pending before the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta.

          It is urged further on behalf of the OP that enlisted contractor of the WBSEDCL had been to the spot for effecting the service connection, but due to strong physical resistance made by Smt. Mayarani Hazra, claiming herself as one of the co-sharers of the plot in question, the service connection could not be effected and according to the Ld. Advocate for the OP there is no deficiency on their part.

          We have carefully gone through documents filed by the parties and the materials on record.

          From the Khajna receipt supplied by the complainant, it appears that the land tax was deposited by him in respect of plot no. 1464, 1466 and other plots. The Certified copy of the Deed no. 2853 of 1984 stood in the name of the complainant filed by the complainant in relation to Dag no. 1464 as also the Parcha produced by the complainant appertaining to Dag no. 1464, 1466 and other of Khatian no. 332, Mouza – Tajpur, Dist. – Purba Medinipur, support his co-ownership of these plots including plot no. 1464 through which the overhead electric line is intended to be taken by the complainant for getting service   connection to his house at plot no. 1466. No document is forthcoming on behalf of the OP to show that a case is pending before the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta in respect of plot no. 1464.

          On due consideration of the material on record and in the light of the discussion made above and having regard to the submission made on behalf of the parties, we find no cogent ground for raising objection/obstruction by Smt. Mayarani Hazra to effect service connection in favour of the complainant as contended by the OP.

          That being the position, to our mind there can not be any hindrance on the part of the OP to give effect of the service connection in favour of the complainant.

          Therefore, we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to get relief as sought as to direction upon the OP for effecting service connection in his favour as applied for.

          Hence, it is,

ORDERED

          that the instant complaint case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP with direction upon him to effect electric service connection in favour of the complainant’s portion with police help, if necessary, within 45 days from the date of communication of this order failing which the complainant will be at liberty to execute the case in accordance with law.

          In case the OP fails to comply with this order within the stipulated period, he will liable to pay a fine @ Rs.50/- per diem from this day till compliance of the order. Parties would bear their own cost in the facts and circumstances.

Dictated and corrected

by me.

                         President

                                                                                S S. Ali                                                A.K. Bhattacharyya

                                                                                Member                                               President