West Bengal

Dakshin Dinajpur

CC/13/2018

Sri Asit Sarkar, S/O- Late Anil Sarkar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Assistant Engineer, W.B.S.E.D.C.L. , Kumarganj Customer care Centre - Opp.Party(s)

Sandeep Kundu

31 May 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
Dakshin Dinajpur, Balurghat, West Bengal
Old Sub jail Market Complex, 2nd Floor, P.O. Balurghat, Dist. Dakshin Dinajpur Pin-733101
 
Complaint Case No. CC/13/2018
( Date of Filing : 25 Jan 2018 )
 
1. Sri Asit Sarkar, S/O- Late Anil Sarkar
Vill- Azadpur, P.O.- Safanagar, P.S.- Kumarganj, Pin- 733141
Dakshin Dinajpur
West Bengal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Assistant Engineer, W.B.S.E.D.C.L. , Kumarganj Customer care Centre
Vill & P.O.- Mahipur, P.S.- Kumarganj, Pin- 733141
Dakshin Dinajpur
West Bengal
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Shyamalendu Ghosal PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MS. Swapna saha Lady Member
 HON'BLE MR. Subhas Chandra Chakraborty MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:Sandeep Kundu, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 31 May 2018
Final Order / Judgement

Not providing service connection for about a year by the OP has galvanized the complainant to lodge this complainant u/s 12 of the C.P, Act 1986 for adjudication and redressal.

The complaint may be epitomized that the complainant had completed all formalities with the Op service provider and also deposited Rs.113624/- as demanded by the Op on 15.03.2017 but he has not got his electrical connection for his Husking mill on which  he intended to carry on his livelihood. The complaint says it is an intentional delay on the part of the OP to ride rough shod over his livelihood, so he prayerd for immediate redressal with the compensation of Rs. 60,000/- along with interest.

The Op in his averment in writing has denied all the averments of the complainant and questioned the maintainability of the instant case as the service connection is prayed for industrial connection with commercial purpose. He stated more that being barred by an ad-interim order of the Hon’ble civil judge of Dakshin Dinajpur District Court in case no. T.S.120/2017, the service connection could not be provided. It has also been stated that his men were obstructed by the neighbours of the complainant when he tried to provide the service connection in earlier occasion before the said ad interim order.

On argument the ld. Lawyer for the complainant stated to the Forum with documents (kept in file) that the said ad interim order for statusquo has been partly vacated by the Hon’ble judge in the said case regarding providing essential service. The order has been made by the civil judge (senior division) Dakshin Dinajpur court on 23.02.2018 and has been furnished to this forum on 26.04.2018, the copy of which has been served to the Ld. Lawyer of the OP. But the connection has not yet been provided. In reply to the question by this Forum the Ld. Lawyer stated that he has not formality submitted copy of the order dt.23.02.2018 regarding case no. T.S.120/2017 to the OP office. He claimed immediate action from the OP so that the complainant’s livelihood may not be hampered any further.

Ld. Lawyer for the Op questioned the maintainability of this complaint as this is an industrial connection with commercial purpose. He also stated more to this Forum that the Op had no mala fide intention to harass the complainant, but due to some legal bearings as stated in his written version he could not do the job. He prayed more to this Forum that if this Forum makes an order for providing  service connection they must abide by the it; but they need administrative protection in this regard as they had faced bitter experience in the earlier occasions while trying to provide service connection.

 

Point for decision:-

  1. Is the instant complaint maintainable under the provision of section 2 (d) of the C.P Act 1986?
  2. Is therre any deficiency on the part of the OP and also is the complainant eligible for getting any compensation?

 

DECISION  WITH  REASONS

From the above discussion it reveals that the complainant has prayed for industrial connection for constructing a husking mill on which his livelihood will depend. Though it is an industrial connection with commercial purpose but in regard to the explanation of section 2 (d) of the C.P Act 1986 this is the livelihood of the OP, so the complainant is regarded as ‘consumer’. It is fact that the OP has failed to provide  service connection in time  due to some disturbance of the local people and also legal bearings of the civil suit as stated earlier. But in respect of the order by the Hon’ble civil judge (senior division) of Dakshin Dinajpur District Court in case no. TS 120/2017 dated 23.02.2018, the OP may now provide electrical connection which is an essential service for the livelihood of the complainant.

 

    Hence, it is

                                                O R D E R E D

 The case is allowed on contest. The OP is directed to provide electrical service connection as against consumer ID no.401873551 within a month from the date of this order. Necessary assistance of administration is to be taken by the OP in doing the job, if needed.

The case is disposed of without levying any cost.

 

            Let a plain copy of this order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Shyamalendu Ghosal]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MS. Swapna saha]
Lady Member
 
[HON'BLE MR. Subhas Chandra Chakraborty]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.