This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

          Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that he is residing at 1/K, B.K. Paul Lane at present 1K, B.K. Paul Lane, Kolkata – 700 030 and applied for separate electric connection for domestic use in his residence by filing an application form bearing No.73416626228 dated 18-05-2012.  Thereafter, he was served a notice on 18-05-2012 for inspection for supply of electricity and inspection would be carried out on 04-06-2012 at 9-00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. and accordingly the employees of the OP1 came to residence of the OP1 on 04-06-2012 and OP2 and his men started disturbance during the inspection work for which inspection worker went back and the OP2 uttered the words before them that he is the owner of the property in question by virtue of Registered Deed of Gift executed and registered in his favour by his mother since deceased and the OP2 claimed that he is the owner of the property but fact remains that the complainant along with all other brothers filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the OP2, the elder brother of the complainant, challenging the aforementioned deed of gift  and the declaratory suit being Title Suit No.120 of 2009 has been filed which is pending before the Ld. 1^st Civil Judge(Junior Division) at Sealdah.

          Subsequently OP1 gave another notice dated 04-06-2012 to let the complainant know as to when another inspection can be carried out after the selection by the complainant of a suitable common position for AC service installation and complainant gave notice dated 10-08-2013 addressed to the District Engineer, CESC Ltd. with a request to let the complainant know as to when another inspection can be carried out and OP advised the complainant during inspection on 04-06-2012 that no objection certificate of the brothers and the complainant namely Nirmal Roy for installation of meter on the outside wall of his room shall be enclosed with the said notice and no objection was duly received by the office of the OP1 on 10-08-2013 and in the said notice some corrections as regards the address of premises of the complainant was requested to be corrected.  But OP1 in respect of the same has not taken any step but the right to enjoy electricity is one of the basic necessities of life and it is an essential service and the complainant is entitled to enjoy the said service as his legal right and the statute is very clear that even an occupier can get the supply of electricity.  So, in the circumstances for negligent and deficient manner of service the present complaint was filed directing the OP to install new meter to give fresh connection.

          On the other hand OP1 CESC by filing written statement has submitted that the present complaint is not maintainable in the eye of law and fact remains OP Gopal Roy submitted papers to show that said premises is under Litigation.  Civil Suit is filed against complainant being suit no.120 of 2009 before the Ld. 1^st Civil (Junior Division) at Sealdah and complainant did not mentioned at the time of filing the complaint that there is litigation in respect of the case premises.

          It is further submitted by the OP1 that as per Electricity Act 2003 and Regulation it is necessary for consent of other consumer for shifting the meter room to another common spaces and it is necessary for consent of the other OP for shifting back the said meter room to another common places and further OP submitted that without consent of the other consumers of the said premises it is not possible for this OP to provide separate meter in the name of the complainant at any place of the premises.  Further it is submitted that it is a private dispute between the disputed co-sharer of the premises and however, if the Ld. Forum so directs the OP1 shall have to give supply to the applicant on compliance of the necessary order of the Forum.  The OP cannot supply it as per Rule and norms when the properly is in the name of the OP2.  So, in the circumstances, there was no laches and deficiency on the part of the OP1.

          Whereas OP2 Gopal Roy by filing written statement submitted that till now he is the owner of the said property by virtue of a registered deed and complainant and others have filed Civil Suit before Civil Judge Junior Division, Sealdah in TS No.120 of 2009 and proceeding is pending and complainant and other persons have failed to prove that they have their right in the property in question as recorded in the Municipal register in the name of OP2 and he is the owner of the holding and practically in the circumstances OP has no right to grant any electricity to the complainant.  It is further submitted that prior to the present compliant complainant was consuming electricity forcibly from his wife’s meter without paying any consumption charges and there was huge duties of electricity bill which was consumed by the complainant from his wife’s meter and as such for non-payment of huge electric bills used by the complainant and not paying the said amount of consumption of electricity byte he complainant from his wife’s meter the Calcutta Electricity Supply Corporation authority have disconnected his wife’s electric meter and remove the said meter from the above said premises.  Moreover, a writ application being W.P. No.18931 (W) of 2013 is pending before the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta against the Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation and that in view of the above circumstances it would not be just and legal to issue any connection in the name of the complainant at the premises in that case complainant’s legal right shall be disturbed and moreover this complaint is not maintainable for which the complaint should be dismissed.

Decision with Reasons

On proper study of the complaint and including written version and also considering the entire materials on record it is found that complainant including some other brothers of OP2 filed a Civil Suit before Civil Judge, Junior Division, Sealdah being Title Suit No.120 of 2009 and complainant and other failed to get any order of injunction and in fact, Deed of Gift has not been declared invalid but as per Deed of Gift Gopal Roy is the owner of the premises and it is found that the Ld. Lawyer of the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency and negligence on the part of the OP Electricity Authority.  Further it is proved that this complaint enjoyed the electric meter of the wife of Gopal Roy and consumed the same.  Therefore he did not pay huge electric bill and for which the electric connection of the OP2’s wife is disconnected and meter have been removed so it is clear that the present complainant is in a habit to consume electricity and not to pay the said amount and when in this it is proved that he consumed the electricity from the electric line of OP2’s wife then it is the duty of the complainant to clear the amount but he has not paid it that means he is one type of defaulter even after consuming electricity.  Complainant has not denied that fact then it is clear that up to this stage complainant has no right in the holding as per record but anyhow they are trying to establish their right but in fact they have failed to prove their any sort of right as yet.  Ld. Civil Judge also has not granted any interim relief to the complainant and others in this regard for which they failed to get the electric connection.

          It is settled principle of law that the complainant is not the tenant of the OP2 and he has failed to prove any sort of right in his favour and, in fact, he has trying to dislodge the OP2 from the said premises and for which Civil Litigation has been started.  In the above situation we find that OP shall have to proceed as per law when as per provision of law it is must for anyone to show that he is a bona fide possessor in the premises but in the present case the bona fide title or any legal possession of the complainant is not proved.  On the contrary, this holding is in the name of the OP2 and documents also support that he is the owner and possessor of the said property what he got on the basis of the deed executed by her mother so in any circumstances complainant cannot claim any right and he has no right to get any electric connection in the said premises in view of the fact his right has already been terminated if any as heirs on his mother’s death.  So, as law abiding citizen he is creating trouble to the OP2 but complainant has such right in respect of property till no decree is passed from the Civil Court.

          Fact remains this complainant enjoyed electricity from the electric meter and line of the wife of the OP2 but he has not paid for which for arrear connection has been disconnected so it is clear that he is one type of defaulting member in respect of consuming electricity and for his illegal act and non-payment of the said huge electric bill that electric meter of the wife of the OP2 has been disconnected and meter has been removed by the OP1.  So, such a scrupulous person cannot be given relief in this case.  When suit was filed by the complainant and others then complainant may pray before the Civil Court for relief, when there is a complicated question of law regarding title and possession and in the present case the possession of the complainant in case property is not at all proved.  In this regard it is to be mentioned that Civil Suit is pending and this case is filed prior to this consumer complaint.  So, it was the duty of the complainant to file such application before the Civil Court for getting further relief when they have already entered into Civil Litigation and rightly OP CESC did not supply any new connection to the complainant due to such litigation in between the family members of the complainant and the OP2 and no doubt as per document municipal tax receipt, Electricity receipt OP2 is the absolute owner of the property.  So, OP1 CESC rightly did not consider the prayer of the complainant and in fact, in such sort of complicated premises electric connection should not be given because in that case electricity supply shall be deceived by so called unauthorized illegal possessors who are claiming line before the Consumer Forum but Forum shall be very much cautious about that otherwise the electricity authority shall be deceived by some unscrupulous consumers like complainant.   In the light of the above findings we are convinced to hold that when Civil Suit is pending in respect of the disputed premises and when complainant’s constructive possession in the premises is not proved, complainant may file before Ld. Civil Senior Judge for restraining the OP2 of the said suit for disturbing CESC for giving connection and in that case complainant may get such relief the Forum has no jurisdiction at this stage to consider and to direct the OP CESC to grant any line in view of the fact Civil Suit is pending in respect of right title and interest of possession and truth is that up to date OP2 is rightful and legal owner and possessor over the property and so the complainant has miserably failed to prove the deficiency, negligence on the part of the CESC and the CESC acted legally and within the ambit of the Electricity Act, 2003 and Regulations as made by the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Authority Act and Rules.  So, the entire complaint bears no merit in the eye of law and no doubt complainant has not paid huge electricity amount after consuming electricity through the meter of the wife of Gopal Roy and so, he shall have to pay that bill of the said connection since disconnected line of wife of Gopal Roy and fact remains the whole conduct of the complainant is found unfair and for which such an unfair person must not be entertained by the electricity authority for giving any connection without any order from the Civil Court. 

In the result, the case succeeds.

Hence,

Ordered

That the case be and the same is dismissed on contest with a cost of Rs.5,000/- each against both the OPs and complainant shall have to pay Rs.5,000/- each as penal cost to this Forum within one month from the date of this order.