Ld. Advocate(s)
For Complainant: Mahua Chowdhury
For OP/OPs : Roji Sultana
Date of filing of the case :17.03.2022
Date of Disposal of the case : 01.06.2023
(2)
Final Order / Judgment dtd.01.06.2023
Complainant above named filed the present case against the aforesaid OP u/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 praying for direction upon the OP to issue new electric connection, compensation amounting to Rs.30,000/- and cost of the case amounting to Rs.15,000/-.
He alleged in the petition of the complaint that his farther before his death applied for new electric connection before the OP and he deposited Rs.868/- on 07.03.2021 vide application no.303452217 but OP did not give any electric connection. Thereafter, after death of father complainant sent a legal notice to the OP through the Ld. Advocate on 07.12.2021. OP gave a reply stating that connection to the intending consumer could not proceed due to outstanding dues lying at the same premises. He further stated that in the name of complainant or his family member no other service connection exists. Complainant’s father property has been duly recorded in separate L.R. Khatian. As the OP refused to give electric connection. Hence, the complainant filed this case.
Complainant at the time of filing this case also filed a petition u/s 38(8) of C.P. Act, 2019. After hearing of the Ld. Advocate for the complainant this Commission issued an ad-interim order directing the OP to give temporary connection to the complainant. Said petition was heard in presence of Ld. Advocate for both the parties on 19.10.2022 and this Commission vide his order dated 19.10.2022 allowed the said petition on contest and permitted the complainant to enjoy the aforesaid temporary connection till disposal of this case.
OP appeared in this case and filed W/V. He denied the entire allegations of the complainant. He further stated that in the aforesaid premises one electric connection is already exist in the name of Ashrukana Biswas having consumer I.D. 333205160 who is the Jethima of complainant. In the said service connection outstanding dues is lying as Rs.29,915.33 LPSC amounting to Rs.21,078.54 as on 21.04.2022. Said connection was given to Ashrukana Biswas on 17.12.2008. He further stated that as per physical inspection it was found that there is no physical separation in between the premises of intending consumer and aforesaid existing consumer namely Ashrukana Biswas. It is not possible to differentiate the premises as stated above. He further stated that he gave temporary connection to the complainant on 19.04.2022 after receiving order of this Commission.
Trial
During trial complainant filed affidavit in chief. OP filed questionnaire and complainant gave answer.
On perusal of order no.19 dated 12.04.2023, we find that OP refused to adduce any evidence.
(3)
Brief Notes of Argument
Complainant filed BNA on 16.05.2023. OP also filed BNA.
Documents
During trial Complainant produced the following documents viz :
- Copy of letter dated 21.12.2021 issued by OP in favour of complainant’s father relating to new electric connection as per his application vide no.3003598577 dated 07.03.2021........(One sheet).......(Xerox)
- Application form for new electric connection..........(One sheet).......(Xerox)
- Xerox copy of bill of Ashrukana Biswas...........(One sheet)
- Status as per computer relating to application no.3003598577........(One sheet).......(Colour)
- Death certificate of Dinabandhu Biswas........(One sheet)........(Original)
- Postal Receipt........(One sheet).......(Original)
- Legal notice dated 07.12.2021 issued by Advocate Suman Kumar Mukhopadhyay.........(Two sheets).........(Original)
- Postal Receipt...........(One sheet).......(Original)
- Copy of RTI application dated 07.12.2021........(Two sheets).......(Xerox)
10)Letter issued by AE&SM dated 3.02.2022 address to Advocate of the complainant namely Suman Mukhopadhyay........(One sheet).......(Original)
11)L.R. record (Certified copy)........(One sheet)
12)Copy of electric bill for the month of November, 2022 to January, 2023 amounting to Rs.1405/-......(One sheet)........(Original)
13)Letter of complainant address to AE&SM dtd. 19.04.2021.......(One sheet).......(Xerox)
14)Meter Reading card.........(One sheet)......(Xerox)
Decision with Reasons
We have carefully gone through the petition of complaint filed by the complainant, W/V filed by the OP, affidavit in chief filed by the complainant and documents filed by the complainant. We have considered those documents.
On perusal of letter dated 21.12.2021 issued by OP NO.1 in favour of father of the complainant, we find that OP NO.1 informed the father of the complainant that an amount of Rs.29915/- is pending against
(4)
Consumer I.D.333205160. Therefore application for new connection of father of the complainant was withheld till clearance of all the outstanding dues.
On perusal of death certificate issued by Joyghata Gram Panchayet, we find that complainant’s father Dinabandhu Biswas died on 05.11.2021.
On perusal of legal notice dated 07.12.2021, we find that Ld. Advocate Suman Kumar Mukhopadhyay issued the said notice to the OP on behalf of the complainant asking him to install the new electric connection within 15 days from the date of receipt of the legal notice failing which complainant shall take appropriate legal action.
On perusal of another letter issued by Ld. Advocate for the complainant addressed to OP under RTI Act, we find that complainant wanted to know as to why electric connection was not given to the complainant till date. Ld. Advocate for the complainant argued that OP did not give any reply in respect of said RTI.
On perusal of letter dated 03.02.2022, we find that OP gave a reply to Ld. Advocate Suman Kumar Mukhopadhyay. In the said letter he stated that connection to the intending consumer bearing application no.3003598577 could not processed due to outstanding dues lying at the consumer premises.
Complainant argued that his father’s property/house has been recorded in separate LR Khatian.
On perusal of certified copy of LR Khatian No.288, we find that said Khatian has prepared in the name of complainant’s father.
OP stated in his W/V that there was a connection in the said premises in the name of Ashrukana Biswas having Consumer ID 333205160 and outstanding dues is lying amounting to Rs.29915.33 and said Ashrukana Biswas is the Jethima of complainant.
OP failed to establish by sufficient documents that house of complainant and house of Ashrukana Biswas are the same premises. On the other hand, complainant established by producing LR record that said property exclusively stands in the name of his father. Accordingly, we find that OP failed to establish the aforesaid allegation.
During argument Ld. Advocate for the OP argued that there is a government circular vide regulation 13.9 of the notification 46 of WBERC dated 31.05.2010. As per the said notification OP is not authorised to give service connection to the complainant if the aforesaid dues of Rs.29915.33 not cleared of till date. But Ld Advocate for the OP filed said notification before this Commission.
(5)
We have carefully gone through the same. We find that in 13.9 it has mentioned “ For getting new connection for supply of electricity from a licensee an intending consumer shall be required to pay all outstanding dues to the licensee in respect of any other service connection held in his / her name located in the area of supply of the same licensee and he / she also be responsible for payment of outstanding charges calculated in a prorated manner, if it is established that he / she has had a nexus with the previous consumer(s) including the purchaser/ the new lessee / the new tenant of a property or a portion thereof in respect of which there are outstanding charges and / or who has / had benefited from non- payment of the aforesaid outstanding dues by the previous consumer(s) to the licnesee.”
As per the , said provision complainant taking the nephew (husband’s brother’s son) is not bound to pay the outstanding dues of his “Jethima”.
So, we not find any nexus in between the dues of Ashrukana Biswas and present complainant and present complainant should not forced to pay the outstanding dues of his Jethima Ashrukana Biswas.
Accordingly, we find that no merit in the aforesaid argument of the Ld. Advocate for the OP.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, it is clear before us that said Ashrukana Biswas is a man of separate family and complainant cannot be liable for the outstanding dues of another family or another person.
Accordingly, we are of the firmed view that OP cannot be compelled the complainant to pay outstanding dues amounting to Rs.29,915.33. So the reason which has been assigned by the OP for refusal of electric connection is not tenable at all in the eye of law.
During pendency of this case, as per order of this Commission OP gave a temporary connection to the complainant and complainant enjoying the same.
Having regard to the aforesaid discussion, we have no hesitation to say that OP cannot refused to provide electric connection in favour of the complainant and he cannot asked the complainant to clear outstanding dues of Ashrukana Biswas amounting to Rs.29,915.33.
In the result present case succeeds.
Hence,
It is
Ordered
(6)
that the present case be and same is allowed on contest against OP with cost of Rs.3,000/-(Rupees three thousand) to be paid by OP in favour of the complainant.
Complainant is directed to give electric connection in favour of the complainant as per his application vide no.3003598577 dated 07.03.2021 in favour of the complainant in continuation of the temporary connection which has given to him as per order of this Commission dated 04.03.2022.
OP is further directed to pay compensation amounting to Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand) in favour of the complainant for his harassment, mental pain and agony.
Let a copy of this judgment be supplied to both the parties as free of costs.
Dictated & corrected by me
............................................
PRESIDENT
(Shri DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS,) ..................... ..........................................
PRESIDENT
(Shri DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS,)
We concur,
........................................ .........................................
MEMBER MEMBER
(NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY) (MALLIKA SAMADDAR)
