DATE OF FILING                    :     02.12.2014.

DATE OF S/R                            :      09.01.2014.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     18.06.2015.  

Sukumar Dhara,  

son of late Pannalal Dhara,  

having its office at 205, Panchanantala Road, P.S. Howrah,

District Howrah. ………... …..…………………………...……….…...  COMPLAINANT.

• Versus-

   

  1.         The District Engineer,

  CESC Ltd.,

  having its regional office at 433/1,  G.T.  Road ( North ),

  P.S. Golabari, District Howrah,

  PIN  711101.

   

  2.         Ashoke Khan,

  119, Makardah Road, P.S. Bantra,

  District Howrah,

  PIN 711 101.…………………………………………………....Opposite Parties.

                                                P    R    E     S    E    N     T

             Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

                               Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

                                Hon’ble Member       : Shri A.K. Pathak.       

F   I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1. The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has prayed for direction upon the o.p. no. 1 for effecting new electric connection by shifting the existing meter being consumer no. 5712110007 in his tenanted portion, to pay a Rs. 5,000/- as litigation costs along with other order/ orders as the Forum may deem fit and proper.

    

2. The case of the complainant, in brief, is that the complainant isa tenant in respect of one pucca room ( ground floor )situated at holding no. 205, Panchanantal Road, P.S. & District Howrah, at a monthly rental of Rs. 2,350/- per month, under late Biswanath Khan, the father of Ashoke Khan, being o.p. no. 2 in this case.As he has no electric connection in his name, heapplied before the CESC Authority, herein o.p. no. 1, to change the existing meter being consumer no. 5712110007 in his name,erstwhilelying in the name of late Biswanath Khan.Subsequently the o.p. no. 1, CESC Authority, disconnected the said electric connection. Thereafter complainant submitted an application dated 11.2.2014before the CESC Authority for fresh electric connection and deposited requisite fees of Rs. 2,000/- under reference no. 06/02976/14 and the o.p. no. 1 informed the complainant that he was require to show the schedule common position for shifting the existing connection. As there was a strong objection from the o.p. no. 2, o.p. no. 1 could not install electric connection and complainant filed a Writ Petition being no. 9021/2014 (W) before the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. The Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta, was pleased to pass an order directing the o.p. no. 1 to dispose the case of the complainant within a fortnight from the date of receipt of this order. Subsequently,CESC Authority fixed a date for hearing on 27.10.2014 and considering the submission and documents, the prayer was rejected by o.p. no. 1 as complainant failed to prove his possession / occupation at the said premises. Being frustrated and finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant complaint with the aforesaid prayers.Hence the case.

    

3. Notices were served upon the o.p. O.p. appeared and filed written version. Accordingly, the case was heard on contest against the o.p.

    

   4.        Upon pleadings of   parties two points arose for determination :

    

   i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the written versions filed separately by both the o.ps. along with all necessary documents including the order of the Apex Court.  On careful perusal of all the documents it is very much clear that complainant has miserably failed to establish any kind of possession or occupation at the same premises by virtue of any document. And it also the fact that different civil suits are pending under the above premises. Moreover, Annexure ‘F’ & ‘G’ dated 25.02.2015 of the BNA filed by o.p. no. 2, it is crystal clear that complainant is not at all an occupier with respect to the schedule premises being no. 205, Panchanantala Road, Howrah 711101, because there is no existence of the premises being no. 205, as the premises having numbers 202, 204, 205 have already  been amalgamated. Under the above premises, complainant has failed to prove his case.

      In the result, the complaint fails.

      Hence,                             

O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 619 of 2014 ( HDF 619 of 2014 )  be and the same is   dismissed  on contest without    costs as  against  the O.Ps.    

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

  (    Jhumki Saha)                                              

  Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.