Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/124/2013

Molla Ali Hussain - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Assistant Engineer - Opp.Party(s)

E. Srinivasa Rao

18 Feb 2015

ORDER

Reg.of the Complaint:03-06-2013

                                                                                                                                    Date of Order:18-02-2015 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II

AT VISAKHAPATNAM

                   Present:

1.Sri H.ANANDHA RAO, M.A., L.L.B.,

       President

2.Sri C.V.N. RAO, M.A., B.L.,

                                             Male Member

3.Smt.K.SAROJA, M.A., B.L.,

       Lady Member

                                            

 

WEDNESDAY, THE 18^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2015

CONSUMER CASE NO.124/2013

 

BETWEEN:

MOLLA ALI HUSSAIN S/O MEERA SAHEB,

MUSLIM, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

ABBAS OPTICALS, R/A D.NO.4-78/3,

GOPALNAGAR, SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM.

                                                                                             …COMPLAINANT

A N D:

1.THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, RURAL ELECTRIC

SOCIETY, SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM-35.

2.THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, RURAL ELECTRIC

COOPERATIVE SOCIETY, KASIMKOTA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

                                                                                      …OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

This case coming on 21-01-2015 for final hearing before this Forum in the presence of Smt. E.SRINIVASA RAO, Advocate for the Complainant and of Sri S.D.JAGANNADHA RAJU, Advocate for the Opposite Parties, and having stood over till this day for consideration, the Forum made the following:

 

O  R  D  E  R

(As per the Honourable President on behalf of the Bench)

1.       The Complainant filed the present Complaint against the Opposite Parties, directing them for restoration of the Electric Connection bearing Service Connection No.1373 of Abbas Opticals in Gopalnagar, Sabbavaram Mandal Visakhapatnam, compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.10,000/-  towards costs.

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is that he is doing business in the name and style of Abbas Articles bearing No. Service Connection No.1373 from the past 9 years and recently one Barla Ramana and   Gandi Appa Rao,  threatening him to vacate from the show room and also causing inconvenience to his business without having lawful rights. The electric connection No.1373 is fixed in the shop which belongs to one Vantakula Pydam Naidu who is the husband of one Vantakula Yerramma. But, she is living separately from her husband from the last 6 years and he informed the OPs on 26-03-2013 that there is a dispute pending  before Principal Junior Civil Judge Court at Anakapalle between her and Barla Ramana and Gandi Appa Rao i.e., O.S.66/13 and filed I.A. 246/13 for interim injunction, regarding service connection in the said shop room and that on 15-04-2013, all of a sudden the said service connection was disconnected. Then, he complained to SHO, Sabbavaram against Barla Ramana and Gandi Appa Rao and during the course of investigation, he came to know that it was disconnected by electrical line man which is illegal and unlawful. The said act was done at the instance of Barla Ramana and Gandi Appa Rao, his service connection was disconnected without following any due process of law. Though, he approached the OPs requesting them to rectify the problem but they postponed the matter on some pretext or the other and then he got issued notice but they did not rectify the problem. Hence, this complaint.

3.       In spite of receipt of notice and filed Vakalat, the OP did not chose to file counter though issued reply notice at the earlier stage.

4.       To prove the case on behalf of the complainant, he filed his evidence affidavit and got marked Exhibits A1 to A7. On the other hand, on behalf of the OP, inspite of reasonable time granted, they failed to file either counter or their evidence affidavit.

5.       Exhibit A1 is the letter addressed to the 1^st OP by the complainant, dated 26-03-2013, Exhibit A2 is the Bunch of Electricity Bills, Exhibit A3 is the Registered Lawyer’s Notice dated 16-04-2013, Exhibit A4 is the Acknowledgment from OP1 dated 20-04-2013, Exhibit A5 is the Acknowledgement from OP2, dated 20-04-2013, Exhibit A6 is the Reply Notice dated 24-04-2013 and Exhibit A7 is the Electricity Bill.

6.       The complainant filed his written arguments.

7.       Heard oral arguments of the Complainant.

8.       Now the point for determination to be determined in this case is;

Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the OPs and the Complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for?

9.       As seen from pleadings as well as evidence of the complainant, it is evident that he was the tenant under 3^rd party who was admittedly not shown as party to the proceedings.  It is also evident that he filed O.S.No.66/13 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Anakapalli against one Barla Ramana and Gandi Appa Rao along with I.A. 246/13,  requesting interim injunction, pending disposal of the suit regarding the service connection to the show room bearing service no.1373 and that the service connection was admittedly disconnected by one Ganesh lineman of the Electrical Department but not by Barla Ramana and Gandi Appa Rao. It is the contention of the Complainant at the active assistance of the Barla Ramana and Gandi Appa Rao.  The 1^st OP disconnected the service connection for which there is no recroded evidence. The record further shows that issuance of notice by the complainant marked as Exhibit A5, the OP issued A6 reply notice which clearly cause to show that Electrical Service Number No.1373 is in the name of the Vantakula Yernamma w/o Pydamnaidu, she requested the OPs to disconnect the service connection permanently and basing on the letter, the OPs dis-connected the service connection. Therefore, it is clear that disconnection is made in accordance with law at the request of the holder of the service connection viz., Yernamma, admittedly who is not a party to this proceedings. Further, the record shows the complainant doing business in commercial nature in the rented premises. Having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that there is no whatsoever deficiency of service on the part of the OPs, therefore, the complaint deserves to be dismissed.

10.     In the result, this complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, on this the 18^th day of February, 2015.

  Sd/-                                                  Sd/-                                      Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                       MALE MEMBER                       PRESIDENT        

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

  For the Complainant:-

Exhibits	Date	Description	Remarks
A 1	26-03-2013	Letter addressed to the 1st OP	Office Copy
A2		Bunch of Electricity Bills	Photostat copy
A3	16-04-2013	Lawyer’s Notice	Office copy
A4	20-04-2013	Acknowledgement from OP1	Original
A5	20-04-2013	Acknowledgement from OP2	Original
A6	24-04-2013	Reply Notice	Original
A7	03-2013	Electricity Receipt	Original

For the Opposite Party-    nil

  Sd/-                                                  Sd/-                                      Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                       MALE MEMBER                       PRESIDENT