18-02-2015 - Heard the parties on limitation and on merit.
On being satisfied with the grounds the delay of about two months in filing this appeal is condoned.
2. This appeal has been filed against the order of learned District Consumer Forum dismissing the complaint on the ground that litigation with regard to the ownership of the premises in question is pending before the Civil court and the Hon’ble High Court and therefore the respondent/ Electricity Board could not be directed to provide electrical connection to the complainant in the disputed premises.
3. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that on such grounds, the electrical connection could not be refused. He relied on the judgement reported in AIR 2008 Calcutta 66 Amarendra Singh vs. Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. & ors.
4. On the other hand Mr. Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the Board pointed out to the letters dated 16.4.1996 and 21.05.1996 (Annexure-4 and 5) to the reply/ rejoinder to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant, to show that Ashok Lal Pandey, father of the appellant himself objected before the Board that one Balditya Ojha S/o Murlidhar Ojha wanted illegally to take electrical connection in the premises in question without his consent. He submitted that the said judgment is not applicable to the facts of this case.
5. Thus, it appears that apart from the dispute over ownership, there is also dispute with regard to entitlement of electrical connection in the premises in question. The said judgment of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court is of no help to the appellant. The facts and circumstances of this case are quite different.
6. In the circumstances we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order.
7. However, the complainant/ appellant may move before the appropriate forum/ court, if so advised.
With these observations and directions this appeal is dismissed.
Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.
Ranchi,
Dated:-18/02/2015
