West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/198/2017

Smt. Kalpana Bose - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Assistant Engineer & Station Manager BRCC - Opp.Party(s)

Dipankar Pati

18 May 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

                             

   Bibekananda Pramanik, President,

and

Sagarika Sarkar, Member. 

 

Complaint Case No.198/2017

 

Smt. Kalpana Bose W/o-Sri Bibekananda Bose, Vill.Bibiganj(Ranagarage),Town &     P.O.Midnapore, P.S. Kotwali, District - Paschim Medinipur,Pin-721101.   

                                                                                                                    ………..……Complainant.

                                                                              Vs.

1. The Assistant Engineer & Station Manager BRCC, Having its office at Keranitola,Town & P.O.Midnapore, P.S.Kotwali,District- Paschim Medinipur,Pin-721101.
2. Assistant Engineer ,W.B.S.E.D.C.L.,Midnapore,Hsaving its office at Burdge Town,P.O.Midnapore,P.S.Kotwali,Dist.Paschim Medinipur ,Pin-721101.

                                                                                                 .....……….….Opp. Parties.

                                                   

              For the Complainant: Mr. Dipankar Pati, Advocate.

             For the O.P.               : Mr. Swapan Kumar Bhattacharjee, Advocate.

 

                                                                         Date of filling : 13/12/2017                                               

                                                                         Decided on   : 18/05/2018

                               

ORDER

                          Sagarika Sarkar, Member –This consumer complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act has been filed by the complainant Sri Ranjit Jana against the above named O.Ps, alleging deficiency in service on their part.

                Complainant’s case, in brief, is as follows:-

                The complainant has been enjoying the electric service provided by the O.P-W.B.S.E.D. in respect of her service connection no.212039933.  It is stated in the petition of complaint that due to wear and tear, the household wiring in respect of this connection became troublesome and the complainant informed the said facts to the O.P.-W.B.S.E.D.C.L.  After inspection O.P. advised the complainant to replace the electric

                                                                                                                                              Contd………………P/2

 

                                                 

                                                                                                    ( 2 )

wires by new one.  It is further stated in the petition of complaint that the complainant requested verbally the O.P. to take necessary steps to install new electric wires of her service connection and also requested O.P. through application dated 4.9.2017 to that effect but O.P. did not do anything.  Finding no other alternative,  the complainant served advocate’s letter dated 13.11.2017 upon the O.P.  It is the specific allegation of the complainant that on several requests of her,  O.P. did not replace the electric wires of her service connection which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.  Accordingly the complainant has prayed for direction upon the O.P. to install new electric wiring of her service connection and an award of Rs.5,000/- as compensation and litigation cost.

              Both the O.Ps. have contested this case by filling a joint written version.  

                   Denying and disputing all the material allegation labeled against them, it is the case of the O.Ps. that after receiving the letter from the complainant to replace the service cable of the complainant,  L.T. Mobile van staff of the O.P.-W.B.S.E.D.C.L. went to the premises of the complainant on 4.9.2017 and 24.10.2017 to do the needful but they failed to do so due to objection of one of the neighbors of the complainant.  It is stated by the O.P. that after receiving Advocate’s letter on 18.11.2018, the L.T. Mobile van staff of the O.P. had been to the premises of the complainant but due to objection of the some neighbor of the complainant they again failed to install the new wearing.  It is further stated by the O.P. that they are ready to provide the said service to the complainant by another route or by getting way leave permission of the neighbor of the complainant and also stated that as they are ready to provide service so they have no deficiency in service on their part.  Accordingly the O.Ps. have prayed for dismissal of the case with cost.

                   In support of her case, the complainant Smt. Kalpana Bose examined her son Sri Biswajit Bose as PW-1 and during the evidence of PW-1, some documents were marked as exbt. 1 to 4 respectively.   On the other hand, O.Ps. have examined O.P. no.1 as OPW-1 and during his evidence, some documents were marked as exbt. A & B respectively.  

                                                               Points for decision

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs, as sought for?

                                                       Decision with reasons

           Point no.1:-

                           The complainant has alleged that on several occasions she requested the O.Ps. to install new electric cable of her service connection but O.P. did not do anything.  On

                                                                                                                                       Contd…………………P/3

 

                                                  

                                                                                       ( 3 )

 perusal of the evidence of OPW-1 and the  documents filed by the O.P., it appears from the letters dated 24.10.2017 (exbt.A ) and 28.11.2017 (exbt.B) that the L.T. Mobile van staff of the O.P. went to the premises of the complainant on two times to replace the service cable but could not perform the said work due to objection of the neighbor of the complainant.  During the cross examination of OPW-1 it was suggested  to him on behalf of the complainant that no staff  of the O.P. had been to the premises of the complainant for changing the old service line of the complainant. In view of such denial, O.P. did not examine any such staff to say and to prove that he had been to the premises of the complainant for that purpose. Therefore it cannot be held that the O.P. took any action to change the electric wire of the service connection of the complainant. It is therefore held that there is deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. in not changing the electric wire of the existing service connection of the complainant.   

         Point no.1 is decided accordingly in favour of the complainant.

            Point no.2:-

         In view of our above finding, the complainant is entitled to get an order of direction upon the O.P.  for changing electric connection wire of her domestic electric line as prayed for. However, considering the circumstances no order as to compensation and cost is passed. 

         Point no.2 is disposed of accordingly.

         All the points are disposed of.

         In the result, the petition of complaint succeeds in part. 

                                     Hence, it is,

                                                        Ordered,

                                  that the complaint case no.198/2017  is allowed in part against O.Ps. without cost.

O.P. no.1 is directed to change electric connection wire of the complainant’s domestic electric line being consumer no. 212039933 within one month from this date of order.

                     In the event of non-compliance of this order or any part thereof, the complainant may file execution application as per provision of law.

                                   Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

                Dictated and Corrected by me

                           Sd/- S. Sarkar                                                                           Sd/-B. Pramanik. 

                               Member                                                                                      President

                                                                                                                                District Forum

                                                                                                                            Paschim Medinipur