Judgment & Order dt. 15.05.2017
Abrupt disruption of the supply of electricity of the complainant bearing Consumer ID No. 401644219 and Meter No.B4229868, has galvanized the complainant to file the instant case against the OP Nos. 1 & 2 i.e. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.
Briefly stated, the complainant’s case is that he got electricity connection on 18.5.2016 from OP Nos.1 & 2 after having observed all due formalities. Yellow-card was also issued by OP Nos.1 & 2. Electricity bills were also paid by the complainant and the last bill was paid up to October, 2016. Thereafter, on 27.9.2016 at about 4:45 p.m. the OP Nos.1 & 2, all on a sudden, disconnected the electricity connection to the premises of the complainant without giving any intimation to that effect. On 29.9.2016, the complainant submitted an application praying for reconnection, but to no affect. When all the requests for reconnection by the complainant failed on the deaf ears of the OPs, the complainant has filed the instant complaint praying inter-alia for reconnection of electricity line and also for passing an order of compensation at the tune of Rs.90,000/- against the OPs. Hence, the case.
The OPs have filed the written version to resist the complaint, wherein it is submitted that the electricity connection was given to the complainant on the basis of an affidavit and NOC (No Objection Certificate), appearing to be sworn in and signed by one Sanjay Sarkar, the brother of the complainant and also the mother of the complainant in due observance of, inter alia, all formalities. But the said brother of the complainant subsequently raised objection that he and his mother did not sign any affidavit and NOC and that the said affidavit and NOC were false and fabricated. So, relying upon the objection of the brother of the complainant the supply of electricity of the complainant was disconnected on 27.9.2016 for not fulfilling the essential criteria necessary for taking electricity connection by the complainant. According to them, there was no deficiency in service on the part of OPs, in so far as the disconnection of electricity line to the house of the complainant was concerned.
Upon the averments of the parties the following issues are formulated for proper adjudication of the matter in disputes between the parties.
Issues:
- Have the OPs committed deficiency in service while disconnecting the supply of electricity to the premises of the complainant ?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Evidence of the parties
The complainant has filed an affidavit-in-chief and has also got himself examined as PW-1. The documents admitted in evidence on behalf of the complainant are marked as Ext. Nos.1, 2-series, 3, 4-series, 5 and 6-series detailed in the list of documents kept in the record. On the other hand, no evidence whatsoever has been led on behalf of the OPs.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Issue Nos. 1 & 2:
Ld. Lawyer appearing for the OPs has contended that the electricity line to the premises of the complainant was disconnected, because the affidavit and NOC which the complainant filed as part of the formalities required to be fulfilled at the time of taking electricity connection were false and fabricated, as goes the specific objection raised by Sanjay Sarkar, brother of the complainant. According to him, filing the affidavit and NOC is a formality required to be fulfilled by the consumer and if such requirement is not properly fulfilled by the consumer, the consumer is not entitled to get electric connection to his premises. Ld. Lawyer appearing for the complainant has argued that the complainant is admittedly a co-sharer in his house along with his brother and his mother and this being so, he has every right to get electric connection without filing any NOC from his co-sharers. In other words, his co-sharers can never stand in the way of the complainant getting the electricity connection to his premises, provided the complainant is a legal occupier thereof. To fortify his contention, reliance is placed by him on a ruling of West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata, reported in [2011] CJ 839(WB), wherein it has been held that in case of legal occupier or lawful tenant of premises the applicant is not under any obligation to file NOC from the co-sharers or the owner of the premises.
Perused the complaint, written version of the OPs and evidence on record. Considered the submission canvassed on behalf of the parties along with the materials on record.
Supply of electricity of the complainant has been disconnected on the basis of objection raised by the brother of the complainant to the effect that the NOC, which was submitted by the complainant at the time of taking the connection was false and fabricated and that it was not at all signed by brother of the complainant. The OP department should have considered whether the NOC by the brother or mother of the complainant was essentially a requirement for giving electricity connection to the premises of the complainant. But, they did not think over the matter, even for a while. It is admitted fact that the premises the complainant lives in originally belonged to his father who died three years ago. After death of his father, the said premises devolved equally upon the complainant and his brother and also their mother. So, in the facts and circumstances of the case as referred to just above and which goes undisputed, it can never be said that the complainant was not a legal occupier of the premises to which electricity connection was given by the OPs. It has also come to light that there is existence of strong bad blood between the complainant and his brother. Existence of such a strained relation can never stand in the way of getting electricity connection by the complainant. In the ruling as aforementioned it is clearly laid down that a legal occupier or lawful tenant of premises is not under any obligation to file NOC. The complainant is not only the legal occupier of his premises, but also the lawful owner thereof, as one co-sharer has title over every inch of the joint property. Regard being had to all these, we are of the opinion that the OPs have not acted properly by disconnecting electricity line of the complainant to his premises. The complainant is found entitled to electricity connection to his premises. He is also entitled to compensation for hardships caused to him by indiscreet decision of the OPs to disconnect the supply of electricity to the premises of the complainant. Such precipitate action of disconnection of supply of electricity is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
In the result, the case succeeds in part.
Hence it is.
O R D E R E D
that the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OPs with costs, which is quantified to be Rs.2,000/-.
The OP Nos. 1 & 2 are hereby directed not to disconnect the electricity line of the complainant which has been restored by the interim order of this Forum and not to insist on submission of either affidavit or NOC by the complainant. They will not be able to disconnect the electricity line of the complainant for non-submission of affidavit or NOC by the complainant. They are also directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- as compensation for harassment caused to the complainant by them along with the cost of litigation i.e. Rs.2,000/- within a month of this order, failing which the compensation amount will bear interest @12% p.a. till the full realization thereof.
Let a plain copy of this order be furnished to the parties concerned forthwith free of cost.
