DIST. CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESAL  COMMISSION

NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.

C. C.  No. 107/2019

           Date of Filing                                 Date of Admission                           Date of Disposal:                

P R E S E N T                :-       Smt. Sukla Sengupta………………….President

                                       :-       Smt. Monisha Shaw …………………. Member.

                                       :-        Sri Abhijit Basu……………………….Member

JUDGMENT / FINAL ORDER

             This is complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

            The complainant files the instant application under Section 12 read with Section 13 of the C.P. Act, 1986 as amended upto date.

            The fact of the case in brief, is that the complainant being a senior citizen is a bonafide customer and a consumer under WBSEDCL and his customer ID is 154089889 and is using the said electricity connection for a period of more than 30 years without any interruption. The opposite parties are company limited deals with Electricity and running business almost through out of West Bengal including North 24 Parganas. It is further stated that the O.P.. No.1 i is the Head Office of WBSEDCL, and the O.P. No. 2 is the Divisional office of the O.P. No.3.

            It is the case of the complainant that at the time of getting the electricity connection in his residence 30 years ago he got the NOC from the then land owner. It is alleged that 18.10.2018 at about 04:00 P.M the electricity connection of the complainant was disconnected. On enquiry from the Station Manager, Gailghata Customer Care the complainant came to know that the O.P illegally disconnected the electricity connection of the complainant from their pole.

            Thereafter on repeated requests of the complainant the men of the O.P-members came on spot for reconnection of electricity connection in the house of the complainant but on several pretext they did not restore the same and the basic facility of electricity did not render to the complainant for the O.P- parties. Then the complainant lodged complaint before Gaighata P.S. as well as in the Regional offce, Bidyut Bhavan of O.P. No.1 and on 30.11.2018 the complainant lodged the petition of complaint before R.G.R.O, Barrackpore.

Contd/-2

C. C.  No. 107/2019

:: 2 ::

It is further case of the complainant that even on repeated requests for reconnection of the electricity connection in his residences the O.P parties did not pay any attention and intentionally harassed him and his family members and caused mental pain and agony of them which amounts deficiency in serviced on the part of the opposite parties.. Hence this petition of complaint is filed by the complainant with a prayer to give direction to the opposite parties for restoration of electricity connection of the complainant being consumer ID No. 154089889 at their earliest either or severally.

            It is also the prayer of the complainant to give direction to the opposite parties for giving clarification the reason of disconnection with cogent documents either or severally.

            It is further prayer of the complainant to give direction upon O.P. No.2 to pay compensation of Rs. 100,000/- for harassment, mental pain and agony along with litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/-.

            O.P parties have contested the claim application filed by the complainant by filing a written version denying all the material allegations against on them. It is the O.Ps’ case that the complainant/ petitioner being consumer ID. No. 154089889 ,date of connection 15.01.2000, connected load 0.64 KW. On 15.01.2000 as per instruction of the complainant service connection was installed over the vacant land without any objection from any corner. At present there are so many houses and there is no space/ way to draw any electric line.

            It is further stated by the opposite parties in their written version that the petition lodged by the complaint vide docket No. 19178040 dated 18.10.2018, docket No. 19181387 and 19182335 dated 19.10.2018 for Lt wire problem and conductor snapping. On the maintenance mobile van visited the premises on 18.10.2018 and 19.10.2018 to restore the service connection but unable to restore the line from existing way due to objection raised by local people for their safety.

            It is further stated that Senior Manager, Gaighata CCC along with SAE(E) Gaighata CCC and other technical staff visited the premises of complainant on 11.04.2019 for effecting the said connection from existing or other convenient technical feasible nearest pole from the said premises but unable to reconnect the service line due to same reasons as described above. Then SM Gaighata CCC has communicated to the complainant over phone on 11.04.2019 at about 2.55 P.M.  and as per discussion he denied to get connection from another convenient technical feasible way and refuse to sign the inspection paper. On 10.06.2019 a date was fixed by Gaighata P.s. and on same schedule date, the representative of WBSEDCL along with police personnel of Gaighata P.S. visited the premises of complainant located at Shimuliapara  on 10.06.2019 at about 11.00 a.m. for restoration of service connection. When the connection of the complainant  was about to effect as mentioned in the order, one Mr. Dilip Mallick along with three other local people raised the objection and made obstruction for the work. According to the said people that they will not provide the way leave to effect the connection. Again WBSEDCL representatives tried their level best to effect the connection then about 50-60 people of Shimuliapara gathered and resist the work and enormous agitation was made. Then the representative of WBSEDCL and local police personnel tried to convince them that we are restoring power from existing structure as per Ombudsman order but they did not listen to them and law and order situation was out of control and the representative of WBSEDCL compelled to leave the place. Due to law and order situation the power was not be controlled from the complainant’s premises and the same was ……… GHT/19-20/181 dt. 10.06.2019. It is further stated that as per filing dated 25.06.2019 or Ombudsman vide W-70-AKT/2019WBSEDCL staffs visited the premises of the

Contd/-3

C. C.  No. 107/2019

:: 3 ::

complainant on 09.07.2019 at about 03.30  p.m. to restore the power to the said premises but same objection raised by the local people as mentioned above. Again the complainant was requested to take connection from other nearby LTOH line which is located approximately 20 meter away from his premises but he has denied to take the connection from other way. So the opposite parties could not be able to restore the electricity connection on the premises of the complainant due to objection as raised by the local people. It is alleged by the opposite parties that the complaint is not maintainable for suppression of the facts. Thus the same is liable to be dismissed.

In view of the above stated facts and circumstances the points for consideration are as follows:-

1.Is the case maintainable in its present form and law?

2. Has the complainant any cause of action to file this case?

3. Is the complainant a consumer in the eye of law?

4. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

5. Is the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for?

Decisions with Reasons

            The opposite parties though filed the the W.V. but from the materials on record it is revealed that they did not take part during the proceeding of this case and also did not take part at the time of hearing of argument.

            All the points for consideration are taken up together for convenience of discussion and to avoid unnecessary repetition.

            From the materials as well as evidence on record it is revealed that this commission / Forum has got the territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to try this case and the case has filed well within the period of limitation.

            Admittedly the complainant lodged the petition of complaint within the period when the opposite parties informed him that they unable to restore electricity connection in his residence from the existing pole. So the complainant has sufficient cause of action to file this case.

            Admittedly the complainant is a consumer having consumer ID No. 154089889 under the opposite parties. It is also admitted fact that since long back on and from 15.01.2000 the complainant is enjoying the electricity connection supplied by the opposite parties at his residence from the existing connection. But the problem arose on 18.10.2018 when the electricity connection in the premises of the complainant was certainly disconnected by the opposite parties.

            Admittedly, the complainant lodged docket No. 19178040 dated 18.10.18, docket No. 19181387 and 19182335 19.10.2018 Lt wire problem and conductor snapping. Admittedly the opposite parties went for restoration of  the connection in the house of the complainant but it is alleged by the opposite parties that they did not restore the same due to objection raised by the local people. But no document has come from the end of the opposite parties in support of their say.  On the other hand from the admission  of the opposite parties it is revealed that till date the electricity connection has not been restored in the residence of the complainant by the opposite parties and they have taken several baseless plea for their non- action.

Contd/-4

C. C.  No. 107/2019

:: 4 ::

            It is well within the knowledge of every person of our country that electricity is the basis need to lead the normal life of a person and the complainant is suffering since long along with his family members including the line also due to non-availability of electricity in his premises without having any cogent reason.

            From the admission of the opposite parties in their written version it is palpably clear that the complainant tried his level best to get the electricity connection in his premises and he made appeal in writing to the door of each and every possible corner for getting back the electricity connection in his premises but in vain. The opposite parties by taking several baseless plea tried to justify their misdeed and non action in this respect which cannot be adored by any court of law and such conduct of the opposite parties should be considered as the negligence and deficiency in service on their part which caused harassment, mental pain and agony to the complainant.

            In view of the discussion made above it is held by this commission that the complainant could be able to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubt and he is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

            The case is properly stamped.

            All the points of consideration are considered and decided favourably to the complainant.

Hence,

                          It is Ordered

            that the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the opposite parties with cost.

            The complainant  do  get the decree as prayed for.

            The opposite parties are directed to restore the electricity connection in the premises of the complainant at once.

            The opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant either jointly or severally along with interest @ 9% p.a. on the amount.

            The opposite parties are further directed to pay litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant either jointly or severally.

            The opposite parties are directed to comply the decree within 45 days from this date of this order, in default the complainant will also get further interest @ of 2% p.a. on the entire amount from the date of default till realization.

            If the opposite parties failed to comply the decree within the stipulated period then the complainant will be at liberty to execute the same as per law. 

Dictated and corrected by me.

President                                                                                        President

Member                                                          Member