DATE OF FILING : 22.04.2014.
DATE OF S/R : 27.04.2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 03.02.2016.
Bhupendra Pratap Singh,
Sri Ram Sevak Singh,
of 17/1, Bon Behari Bose Road,
P.S. & District Howrah. ……………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.
1. The District Engineer,
Howrah Regional Office, CESC Ltd.,
433/1, G.T. Road ( North ),
Howrah – 711101.
2. Sri Prabir Kumar Ghosh,
son of late Provat Kumar Ghosh
of 17/1, Bon Behari Bose Road,
P.S. & District Howrah. ……………………………………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
- This is an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the complainant, Bupendra Pratap Singh, against the o.ps., CESC Ltd. and one Prabir Kumar Ghosh, praying for a direction upon the o.ps. to restore the electric connection to the chamber of the petitioner and directing the o.p. no. 2 to give free access to the men and agents of the o.p. no. 1 for the purpose of restoration and compensation of Rs. 50,000/-.
- The case of the petitioner is that he is a legal practitioner having his chamber in the ground floor of premises no. 17/1, Bon Behari Bose Road, P.S. & District Howrah, and he approached the o.p. no. 1 to install commercial electric connection and the same was supplied bearing his consumer no. 60032020027 with meter no. 4153789 and the petitioner had been enjoying electricity on payment of bills. The o.p. no. 2 is the landlord of the petitioner under whom the petitioner is tenant and the o.p. no. 2 filed civil suit against the petitioner being T.S. 2 of 2011 and the same has been pending before the Sr. Civil Judge, 1st Court, Howrah. The o.p. no. 2 on 18.4.2014 disconnected electricity of the petitioner by cutting of the connection line and the petitioner gave an immediate call to the o.p. no. 1 who came and demanded access to the electric meter but the o.p. no. 2 kept the meter room under lock and key when access to the room was demanded. The o.p. no. 2 refused and they openly told that they disconnected the line and will never reconnect the same. The petitioner went to the local police station and lodged G.D. and he suffered both mentally and physically and thus filed this case with the above prayers.
- The o.p. no. 1 contested the case by filing a written version stating that there is animosity between the petitioner and the o.p. no. 2 and on 18.4.2014 the o.p. no. 2 disconnected the line of the petitioner and this petitioner got an order from this Forum to reconnect the line within 48 hours but the o.p. no. 2 did not open the pad lock. There was ex parte order for shifting of meter from this Forum also. But no shifting could be done as meter room was under lock and key. After laying cable at the occupied portion of the petitioner in presence of police personnel arrangement was made to remove and fix the meter nos. 4153789 and 3972833 standing in the name of petitioner and Brijendranath Singh but the same also could not be done as there was no access to the meter room. The o.p. no 2 filed civil suit in the court of Civil Judge, Jr. Division, being T.S. No. 159 of 2014 directing the o.ps. to maintain statuesque in respect of nature and character of suit property. There is no negligence on the part of the petitioner and no deficiency in service and the o.p. no. 1 is always ready and willing to render service to the petitioner. So the case against o.p. no. 1 is liable to be dismissed.
4. The o.p. no. 2 though appeared in the case but filed no written version and the case was heard ex parte against o.p. no. 2.
- Upon pleadings of parties the following points arose for determination :
- Is the case maintainable in its present form ?
- Whether the petitioner has any cause of action to file the case ?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P., CESC Ltd. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- All the issues are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity for discussion and to skip of reiteration. In the instant case, the petitioner filed affidavit in chief as well as documents showing payment of bills in support of his electric connection since 2009. His oral and documentary evidence proved the fact clearly before this Forum that he is a legal practitioner having his chamber at premises no. 17/1, Bon Behari Bose Road, and he had electric connection in the said premises since 2009 and the o.p. no. 2 being the landlord of the house and the petitioner being his tenant, the o.p. no. 2 disconnected the line of the petitioner in gross violation of the law of the land when the law of the land is that no one should be deprived of light and electricity without proper course of law. It is noticed from the case of the petitioner as well as the case of the o.p. no. 1 that civil cases have been pending between the petitioner and the o.p. no. 2 and the o.p. no. 2 got one statuesque order from the ld. Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Howrah, but reconnection of the line of the petitioner or restoration of the same would in no way cause any violation of the statuesqua injunction order passed by the civil judge as such reconnection or restoration of electric line does not change the nature and character of the suit property as is the established proposition of law. The o.p. no. 2, Prabir Kumar Ghosh, though filed Revision Petition No. 91 of 2014 before the State Commission against the order no. 1 passed by this Forum on 22.04.2014 and order no. 2 dated 29.4.2014 and succeeded in the same yet the o.p. no. 2 did not contest this case by filing a written version though appeared in the case and several opportunities went given to them.
- On scrutiny of the case record including contents of the petition filed by the petitioner as well as o.p. no. 1 and the documents filed by the parties and also keeping in mind the submissions of the ld. counsel of both sides and also keeping in mind the statuesque order passed by the ld. Civil Judge and also the eviction case pending against the petitioner, thisForum has already discussed the matter at length that the civil suit pending is no bar for thisForum to dispose of this case and an injunction order in civil case is also no bar to this Forum to pass an order directing the .o.p. no. 1 to restore the electric connection because such implementation or compliance of the order of the Forumwould in no way cause any violation of thestatuesque injunction order as the same would not change the nature and character of property and issues in the civil suit and points to be decided here are totally different.
In view of above, this Forum finds that petitioner succeeded in proving his case and is entitled to relief as prayed for.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 244 of 2014 ( HDF 244 of 2014 ) be and the same is allowed on contest against o.p. no. 1 without cost and ex parte with costs against o.p. no. 2.
The petitioner is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for and the o.p. no. 1 is directed to restore the electric connection to the petitioner at his chamber situated at 17/1, Bon Behari Bose Road, P.S. & District Howrah and the O.P. no. 2 is directed to give access to the men and agents of the o.p. no. 1 for the purpose of such restoration work failing either the petitioner or the o.p. no. 1 would take assistance of I/C Local P.S. who would render immediate police assistance for compliance of the final order of this Forum if necessary by breaking open the pad lock.
No order is passed to compensation against o.p. no. 1 as no deficiency in service proved against o.p. no.1, but the o.p. no. 2 is directed to pay cost of Rs. 20,000/- as his acts and conducts dragged the petitioner to file such a consumer case before the Forum and out of the said cost of Rs. 20,000/-, Rs. 5,000/- would go in favour of petitioner and the rest of Rs. 15,000/- would be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Fund.
The order not being complied the petitioner would be at liberty to put the order in execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( B. D. Nanda )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah
