IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/30/2018.
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
26.02.18 24.04.18 08.03.19
Complainant: Angura Bibi
W/O Karim Sekh,
Vill And P.O. Kashipur,
P.S. Rejinagar,
Dist.Murshidabad,
Pin 742189.
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Station Manager,Rejinagar CCC,WBSEDCL
P.O. And P.S. Rejinagar,
Dist.Murshidabad,
Pin 742189.
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Sri. Siddhartha Gupta.
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party : Sri. Siddhartha Sankar Dhar.
Present: Sri Asish Kumar Senapati………………….......President.
Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
Asish Kumar Senapati, Presiding Member.
This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.
One Angura Bibi (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against Station Manager, Rejinagar CCC, WBSEDCL (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 filed an application for getting new electric connection on 17.07.14 on payment of application fees of Rs.5/- and deposited quotation amount of Rs.427/- for his application No.3001149408. Ultimately, the Complainant requested the OP for getting new electric connection and filed an application dated 14.06.16 but the OP did not pay any heed to it. Hence, the Complainant has filed the case praying for a direction upon the OP for giving him new electric connection and to pay compensation of Rs.90,427/-.
The OP contested the case by filing written version on 04.07.18, contending that the case is not maintainable as the Complainant is not a consumer and the case is barred by law of limitation as the cause of action arose in 2014. It is the specific case of the OP that the Complainant filed an application for new electric connection and deposited the quotation amount on 10.09.14. The OP inspected the premises and found that there was an electric connection in the same premises in the name of Jeheruddin, Father-in-law of the Complainant, having consumer ID No.312084511 and the said service connection was disconnected due to non-payment of outstanding dues amounting Rs.7,954/-. The outstanding amount was paid on 12.09.15. That after deposit of the outstanding dues, the OP intimated the Complainant either to submit application for permanent disconnection for the existing service connection of her father-in-law or to submit proper documents of separation of their family in order to avoid dispute regarding splitting of load in the same premises according to the guideline of WBERC but the Complainant gave no response. Subsequently, another son of Jeheruddin, namely, Karim Sekh filed an application for disconnection of the electric connection in the name of his disease father, Jeheruddin and the OP disconnected the existing service connection in the name of Jeheruddin on 31.03.18 accordingly and effected the new connection of the Complainant on 05.04.18. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence, the complaint is liable to be rejected.
On the basis of the above versions following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case :
Points for decision
- Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the OP, as alleged?
- Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?
Point no.1
The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the Complainant is a consumer as she hired services of the OP for consideration.
The Ld. Advocate for the O.P. has not argued on this point.
On going through the complaint, written version and other materials on record and on a careful consideration over the submission of both sides, we find that the Complainant is a consumer in terms of section 2 (I )(d) (ii) of the C.P.Act, 1986.
Point No.2
The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and the claimed amount is also within pecuniary limit of the District Forum.
On a careful consideration over the materials on record, we find that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and this Forum has pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Both the points are thus disposed of.
Point Nos.3&4
The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the Complainant applied for new electric connection and ultimately after filing of this case, the Complainant got new electric connection on 05.04.18. It is urged that the Complainant deposited the quotation amount on 10.09.14 but the OP did not give new electric connection for a period of about four years with a view to harass the Complainant.He contends that the Complainant is entitled to get adequate compensation for deficiency in service and for harassment and mental agony.
In reply, the Ld. Advocate for the OP submits that there was a service connection having consumer ID No. 312084511 in the name of Jeheruddin till 31.03.18 in the same premises and the OP was unable to give any new connection as the Complainant failed to submit proper documents of separation of their family.He argues that the Complainant has failed to produce any document before the OP as to her title over the premises in which the new connection was applied for. It is contended that one Karim Seikh, son of Jeheruddin, filed an application before the OP for disconnection of electricity permanently stood in the name of his father Jeheruddin and the service connection was disconnected on 31.03.18. It is urged that the OP effected the new electric connection on 05.04.18 after permanent disconnection of the existing service connection in the name of Jeheruddin. He contended that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. He has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
We have gone through written complaint, written version, and evidence of the Complainant and the xerox copies of the documents.
Admittedly, the Complainant applied for a new electric connection and security deposit and service connection charge amounting Rs.427/- was paid on 10.09.14. Admittedly, the OP gave electric connection to the Complainant on 05.04.18. It is clear from the submission of the Ld. Advocate for the OP that there was a service connection having consumer ID No.312084511 in the same premises in the name of one Jeheruddin, father-in-law of the Complainant and outstanding amount of Rs.7,954/- was paid on 12.09.15. It is also clear from the submission of the Ld. Advocate of the OP that one Karim Seikh, son of Jeheruddin, filed an application praying for permanent disconnection of electric connection in the name of his father Jeheruddin and the said connection was disconnected on 31.03.18 and the OP effected the electric connection of the Complainant on 05.04.18. The Ld. Advocate for the OP submits that the OP could not give new electric connection to the Complainant till 31.03.18 as there was an existing electric connection in the name of one Jeheruddin in the same premises and the Complainant failed to submit proper documents of separation of their family as per guideline of WBERC. Admittedly, the O.P. has given new electric connection on 05.04.18 to the complainant within a short period after permanent disconnection of service connection in the name of Jeheruddin.
On a careful consideration, we find valid substance in the submission of the Ld. Advocate for the OP. Hence, we find that the Complainant has failed to establish that there was any deficiency on the part of the OP. Therefore, we are of the view that the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 26.02.18 and admitted on 24.04.18. 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 orders.
In the result, the Consumer case fails.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint Case No.CC/30/2018 be and the same is hereby dismissed on contest against the OP without cost.
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.
President.
Member President.
