IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/82/2017.
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
01.06.17 08.06.17 19.06.19
Complainant: Ranjit Kumar Pal
S/o Late Haradhan Pal
Vill&PO- Malihate
PS-Salar, Dist-MSD,
Pin-742401
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Station Manager, WBSEDCl,
Salar Group Electric Supply,
PO&PS-Salar, Dist-MSD,
Pin-742401
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Md. Mahatab Ali
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party : None.
Present: Sri Asish Kumar Senapati………………….......President.
Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay, Member.
This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.
One Ranjit Kumar Pal (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against The Station Manager, WBSEDCL, Salar CCC (here in after referred to as the OP) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-
The Complainant is a customer of the OP having consumer ID No 313052042 for his domestic service connection and the Complainant used to pay the bill regularly but all of a sudden in the month of March 2017 the pole from where the electric service connection was given to his house was broken by a vehicle. The men of the OP on 11.03.17 replaced the said broken pole by a new one but after replacing the said pole the OP had not set the electric wire of this Complainant`s house with the new pole. So, the electric supply in the house of the Complainant was disconnected till then. The Complainant requested the OP informing the incident to restore the electric connection but the OP has not paid any heed. The Complainant sent a complaint to the OP by registered post with AD on 17.03.17 but no action has been taken by this O.P in this regard. Finding no other alternative the Complainant filed the instant case for deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
After service of the notice the OP did not turn up. So, the case preceded ex-parte against the OP.
Now the question arises-
- whether the Complainant is a consumer ?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Decision With Reason
Point No.-1
As per provision of section 2(1) (o) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, the supply of Electric energy is service and Consumer means the person who hires or avails of any service for consideration as per provision of section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. In the present case the complainant enjoyed electric connection in his house by paying electricity charges. Accordingly, the complainant stepped into shoes of consumer under the Consumer Protection Act 1986. .
Point No.2
The Complainant stated that the pole from which the service connection had been given to his house was broken by a vehicle. The men of the OP on 11.03.17 replaced the electric pole but they did not connect the electric wire of this Complainant`s house with the new pole. So, the service of the electricity was disconnected and there is no connection in the house of the Complainant till then. It is evident from the record that there was electric connection in the house of the complainant ( vide annexure 1&2 ) and the said connection was discontinued for not connecting the wires of the complainant`s house with the new pole after replacement of the old pole broken by a vehicle
The OP did not turn up after service of the notice to controvert the plea of the complainant . So, we have no other alternative but to accept the plea of the Complainant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents filed before us, we are of the opinion that the complainant should get Electricity Connection immediately to his house .That the acts and omission on the part of the O.P the complainant has been suffering since long time which makes him entitled to compensation to be paid by the O.P for the deficiency in rendering due service as at the time of incident the complainant was the customer of the O.P. For negligence and harassment the complainant should get compensation of Rs.1000/- and litigation cost of Rs 1000/-.We think that the O.P. should be directed to restore the electricity to the house of the complainant by 30 days from the date of this order, subject to realization of electricity charges, if due from the complainant
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 01.06.17 and admitted on 08.06.17 . This Forum tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act,1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day order.
In the result, the Consumer case succeeds.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint Case No. CC/82/2017 be and the same is hereby allowed ex-parte against the OP with the cost of Rs.1,000/-.
The OP is directed to restore the service connection of the Complainant by 30 days from the date of this order, subject to realization of electricity charges, if due from the complainant .
The OP is further directed to pay to the complainant Rs.1,000/- for mental pain and agony and a litigation cost of Rs 1000/- by 30 days from the date of this order.
.
Let plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand /by post under proper acknowledgment as per rules, for information and necessary action.
The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:
confonet.nic.in
Dictated & corrected by me.
Member
Member President
