DATE OF FILING : 13.12.2010
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI
Dated this the 28th day of April, 2011
Present:
SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT
SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER
SMT.BINDHU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No.266/2010
Between
Complainant : K. Guruswamy, Driver,
Door No.MGP 328/XIII,
6 Rooms Lines,
Above Workshop Recreation Club,
H.R.C. Road,
Munnar,
Idukki District. And
Opposite Party : The Manager,
Workshops & Engineering Department,
Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
Munnar P.O.,
Idukki District.
(By Adv: P.J. Kurian)
O R D E R
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
The complainant is working as a driver in the Tata Tea Ltd., from April/1998 and also after the change of possession under the Kannan Devan Hills Plantation Company Pvt.Ltd, Munnar. The power supply given to the line unit occupied by the complainant was disconnected without any notice or information on 14th September, 2010, by the men of the opposite party. On 16.9.2010, the complainant sent a Bankers cheque for Rs.1,000/- drawn in favour of the respondent with a request to reinstate the power connection. But it was not done by the opposite party. On 13th October, 2010, there was an attempt to evict the petitioner forcibly by the respondent and others, which was failed and this complainant had preferred a police complaint also for the same. On 22nd October, 2010, this complainant received a letter under No.EG-21/952 dated 12th October, 2010, in which it is stated that the complainant was engaged as a Bungalow servant and he abandoned work on June 2009 after surrendering the quarters as such, reconnection of power supply does not arises so the Bankers cheque was returned. The complainant was having abdominal pain in the under part and he was under the treatment of the Company's Medical Department. On the advice of the Medical Officer, this complainant went to Madhurai for check up and they suspected attack of cancer in the Testicles so Biopsy was taken and sent for expert opinion. He returned for joining duty on 18th June 2009, but after verifying the report, denied work by the then immediate superior Sr.Muthiah, Deputy Manager. This was reported to the higher officials and they also refused to permit the complainant to join duty or offer alternate employment or any employment. The subject matter was immediately taken up as an industrial dispute through his union and the same is pending before the labour authorities. Even thereafter, the respondents tried to evict the complainant forcibly, while he went for medical check-up and so numerous complaints are pending before the police. The wages for last month was not paid, bonus for the season 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 were not paid and all (cont....2)
- 2 -
claims still remains. The complainant and family are residing in the same line unit, even today. Due to the above criminal activities, the complainant was forced to prefer an original suit before the Munsiff Court, Devikulam as OS No.293/2010 against the threat of forcible eviction and the Court was pleased to pass orders restraining the respondents from trespass and forcible eviction. So it is a clear deficiency in service of the opposite party that the power supply is not yet reinstated. No bill has been issued by the opposite party and the power was disconnected. So this petition is filed for getting reconnection of the electrical power supply and also for compensation for the mental agony caused to the complainant.
2. As per the written version filed by the opposite party, the complainant is not a consumer of electricity in the above line unit since 10.6.2009 when he left the work as bungalow servant of Deputy Manager S.P. Muthiah of KDHP Co. Pvt. Ltd. The complainant was a temporary bungalow servant of S.P. Muthiah, Asst. Manager of KDHP Co. Pvt. Ltd., and was permitted to occupy the line unit in the 6 rooms line building owned by the company MGP 328/XIII situated near the workshop recreation club in the status as bungalow servant of the above manager who engaged him as a bungalow servant by himself. As per the terms of the permission, the complainant has to vacate the line unit when he leaves the work as his temporary bungalow servant. The complainant left the work by himself voluntarily on 10.6.2009 removing all his belongings from the line unit keeping the same open and left the locality. Since 10.6.2009 the above line unit was left unoccupied and seeing the line unit kept open without occupying and based on the reports from company watchers, the company took over custody of the building, disconnected electricity to the unit and kept the same locked for many months. But on 19.11.2010, the complainant has broke open the lock of the unit, trespassed into the unit and unauthorisedly occupied in line unit. He has also filed O.S. 293/2010 dated 23.11.2010 before Munsiff Court, Devikulam for a decree of permanent injunction against the company against forceful eviction from the line unit and is pending. The suit is filed suppressing real and material facts raising false allegations, falsely claiming that he is a permanent driver in the company service. The complainant after voluntarily leaving the work as temporary bungalow servant and leaving Munnar now came back to the area, trespassed into the earlier line unit and started occupying the same unauthorisedly with the malafide intention to induct third parties in the line unit or transfer the line unit to third parties for huge amounts and thereby take undue advantages. Munnar being a tourist centre and where there is scarcity of accommodation in private / government land there is huge demand for similar rooms and land / building encroaches are ready to give huge amounts for similar line units. By the illegal attempt, to induct third parties in the line unit the company has filed O.S. No.5/2011 before Munsiff Court, Devikulam for recovery of possession of the above line unit from the complainant and for permanent injunction against inducting third parties in the line unit or transferring the line unit to third parties for money or otherwise and in the suit I.A. 13/2011 is filed for temporary injunction against inducting third parties and the same is allowed by the court and is pending. The complainant is not a consumer of the opposite party and no amount is due from the complainant as electric charges. The cheque for Rs.1,000/- is forwarded by the complainant with malafide intentions pretending that he is consumer of electricity. The same is returned to him explaining the real situation. Since he is not a worker in the company he is not eligible for any line unit accommodation. The present line unit is unathorisedly occupied by him after trespassing into the locked line unit of the company. As such he is not entitled to any reconnection of electricity to the present line unit. Hence the petition is not at all maintainable.
3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?
(cont....3)
- 3 -
4. The evidence consists of oral testimony of PW1 and Exts. P1 to P15 marked on the side of the complainant and oral testimony of DW1 and Exts. R1(series) to R16(series) marked on the side of opposite party.
5. The POINT :- The complainant produced evidence as PW1. PW1 was a driver in the Tata Tea Ltd and also after the change of possession under the Kannan Devan Hills Plantation Company Pvt. Ltd., Munnar. The Deputy Manager S.P. Muthiah refused to permit him to rejoin duty on 18th June, 2009, and against the same, an industrial dispute is raised through his union and same is pending as ID No.460/2009. Ext.P1 is the copy of the Pendency Certificate issued by the Deputy Labour Officer, Munnar. The power connection of the line unit allowed and occupied by PW1 was disconnected on 14.9.2010 without any notice or information. There is no bill as due to the opposite by the complainant. So PW1 was not able to remit any amount. So PW1 filed banker's cheque with a covering letter. True copy of the banker's cheque dated 16.9.2010 is marked as Ext.P2. A request was given with the cheque and the copy of same with postal receipt is marked as Ext.P3(series). Eventhough it was received by the opposite party, the reply issued by the opposite party on 12.10.2010 with the return of the bankers' cheque stating that the letter issued by PW1 is with malafide intention and which is marked as Ext.P4. PW1 sent another reply for the letter and it is marked as Ext.P5. A letter was issued by the opposite party to the complainant stating that the complainant voluntarily left the job from Munnar and now he is not a consumer of the opposite party and being so they are not able to accept the electricity charges so the DD was also returned. The pay slip, notarised copy of the wage slip, pay slip of the complainant from the opposite party produced and marked as Ext.P7 because the original is produced before the Munsiff Court. Notary attested copy of the pay slip for PW1 for April 2002 and June 2002 are marked as Ext.P8(series). The opposite party tried to evict the complainant forcibly the room and a complaint was filed by PW1 to the Sub Inspector of Police, Munnar, the copy of the same and copy of the complaint filed by works unions Munnar are marked as Ext.P9(series). The notary attested copy of the Provident Fund Annual Statement issued from the opposite party from 1999 to 2000, from 2000 to 2001 and from 2001 to 2002 are marked as Ext.P10(series). PW1 is a member of the Employee's Provident Fund and copy of the receipt shows the same is marked as Ext.P11. Copy of the driving licence of the complainant is marked as Ext.P12. The copy of the letter given by the Deputy Manager – SIPD Finance, Tata Tea Ltd Soumen Bose to the complainant for getting the car pass in Alwaye railway station for receiving his parents, and also stating that the driver is Guruswamy, the PW1 is marked as Ext.P13. The letter by the servant to the employer to deduct the premium in respect of LIC from the salary is marked as Ext.P14 in which it is written that PW1 is the driver. The FI statement of the Munnar Police, for offence under Sec.294(b), 279 and 338 of Indian Penal Code against the complainant are marked as Ext.P15(series). While cross examination, the opposite party, have showed a copy of the salary slip of the Kannan Devan Company Ltd and it is marked as Ext.R1(series) in which the designation of the employee is also written. Another copy of the salary slip of the staff of the company are marked as Ext.R2(series) in which the designation is also noted. The Assistant Manager of Finance, Mr. S.P. Muthiah produced evidence as DW1. The computer print copies of the electricity charge of the bungalow servants from 1st January 2009 to December 2009 are marked as Ext.R3(series), authorised agent of the complainant objected the same because there is no seal or signature of the opposite party company in Ext.R3(series). Ext.R4(series) are the copies of recovery bills of the electricity charges from the opposite party for his servants and bungalow servants in which there is an extra amount of 50/- paise is charged for the electricity on 28.2.2009 for the use of the bungalow servants of Mr.Muthaih in the month of January 2009. That is because the employee servants used excess electricity after 20 units. In it the recovery for other several dates are mentioned. Copy of the attendance check list
(cont......4)
- 4 -
of the complainant is produced and it is marked as Ext.R5. It is also objected by the complainant because no signature or seal of the authorised person is found in the document. The letter issued by DW1 stating to stop the attendance of the complainant from 11 June, 2009 onwards is marked as Ext.R6. But the authorised seal and signature are also not seen in that letter. Another person named Murugan was appointed in that place and the letter issued by the opposite party to appoint the said Murugan as the bungalow servant of the opposite party is marked as Ext.R7. The copy of the medical check up conducted on the said Murugan for appointing as the bungalow servant is marked as Ext.R8. The attendance check list of the said Murugan is marked as Ext.R9. The attendance check list for October, 2009 of Murugan as bungalow servant of the opposite party is marked as Ext.R10. So the complainant was terminated from his service and after that the PW1 trespassed in the property of the opposite party. So a complaint was given to the Munnar Police Station for the same against the complainant by the opposite party and a crime was registered for Sec.447, 427 of IPC and copy of the FIR is marked as Ext.R11. The complainant filed a suit against the opposite party before the Munsiff Court, Devikulam for restraining the opposite party from forcible eviction from the quarters and copy of the plaint is marked as Ext.R12. A suit was filed by the opposite party against the complainant OS No.5/2011 for recovery of possession of quarters and copy of the same is marked as Ext.R13. Ext.R14 is the copy of the medical check up certificate conducted by the complainant for appointing as bungalow servant of the opposite party on 19.9.2006. The pay slip copy issued by the opposite party company, for the drivers named P.J.Andappan, A.P. Francis etc., who were working as drivers are marked as Ext.R15(series). The attendance check list of the complainant from October 2006 to April 2010 are marked as Ext.R16(series).
As per the complainant, he was working as driver in the opposite party company and Exts.P15(a&b) is the copy of FIR registered against the complainant while he was working as driver in the opposite party company and when an accident took place, while he was driving. Ext.P13 is the letter issued by the Deputy Manager of the opposite party deputing the complainant as driver for receiving his parents from Alwaye railway station, for getting car pass. Copy of the driving licence of the complainant is marked as Ext.P12. Ext.P10(series) are the copies of Employee's Provident Fund subscription slip of the complainant while he was working at the opposite party company issued by the opposite party. The pay slip issued from the opposite party to the complainant while he was working there is Ext.P8. So these documents shows that the complainant was working as employee in the opposite party company and it is also evident that the complainant was working in the opposite party company. The only dispute is whether he is a driver of the opposite party or a bungalow servant of the opposite party. As per the opposite party, he was working as bungalow servant of the opposite party and the pay slip of the complainant, copy of the medical check up certificate for joining the complainant as a bungalow servant of the opposite party produced and marked as Ext.R14. It is also admitted by the opposite party that the complainant was working as bungalow servant of the opposite party and not a driver. The attendance register of the complainant which is also produced by the opposite party which are Ext.R16(series).
Now the dispute is that whether the disputed cottage is using by the complainant. As per the complainant, while he was working at the opposite party company, he was affected by cancer in his testis and for the periods of treatment, he availed leave from the company. But they have dismissed him from the service and a dispute is pending before the Labour Officer against the same.
But he was occupying the quarters given by the opposite party and only in the treatment period he left the quarters for a certain period. While the opposite party disconnected the electricity connection of the quarters, the complainant sent a DD of Rs.1,000/- to the opposite party and
(cont....5)
- 5 -
applied for reconnection. That is also admitted by the opposite party. But as per the opposite party, the complainant voluntarily left his employment in the month of June 2009. During the employment as temporary service he was provided a line unit for accommodation and it was surrendered by the complainant so it was taken over by the company when the complainant left the employment. After that the electricity was disconnected from the line unit of the complainant which is stated in Ext.P4 letter written by the opposite party from the Engineering Department to the complainant on 12.10.2010. But in the letter written by the opposite party to the complainant on 6.1.2011 from the Engineering Department by the Senior Manager, it is written that, in Ext.P6, that the complainant voluntarily left the job from Munnar without surrendering the line unit permitted to occupy by him. Since the line unit was kept open and unlocked, the building was taken over by the company. And the room was kept locked by the company for months so the electricity connection also disconnected. After that the complainant unauthorisedly occupied the room. So the allegation in Ext.P6 letter and Ext.P4 letter are quite different. In the FIR register by the Munnar Police, as per the complaint of the opposite party dated 21.10.2010, the complainant had trespassed into the line unit quarters of the opposite party and it is written that the complainant trespassed in the 6 room line of the opposite party on 20.10.2010 at about 2 pm by breaking the lock and it is marked as Ext.R11. As per the plaint filed by the opposite party before the Munsiff Court as OS No.5/2011 which is Ext.R13, it is written that on 19.11.2010 the complainant broke open the lock of the line unit and trespassed into the line unit, started occupying the line unit unauthorisedly and illegally. So there is difference of more than one month in the FIR and in the date mentioned in the suit filed by the opposite party.
It means that the opposite party is not at all aware about the date on which the complainant trespassed in the quarters of the opposite party. So it is clear that the opposite party is not aware when the complainant was exactly residing in the quarters voluntarily. Anyway, it is admitted by the opposite party that the complainant was residing there and now also he is residing in the line unit provided by the opposite party. There are several allegations pending before the Munsiff Court against the possession of the line unit and no order has been passed from the competent Civil Court regarding possession of the line unit. It is admitted by the complainant that he left the job for some period for the treatment of the cancer and an industrial dispute is pending and Ext.P1 certificate also shows the same. The complainant is ready to give the pending electricity bill and a DD was also produced to the opposite party by the complainant for an amount of Rs.1,000/-.
So we think that the dispute regarding the possession of the line unit is pending before the Munsiff Court and also a dispute regarding the employment is pending before the Deputy Labour Officer so it is not proper to disconnect the electrical connection of the complainant before the disposal of these pending disputes before the Munsiff Court and Deputy Labour Officer. We find deficiency in the service of the opposite party, because they have disconnected the electricity connection without any due. The electrical connection was already reconnected by the opposite party as per the Order in IA No.115/2010 by this Forum. It is admitted by the opposite party that the complainant was working as a bungalow servant at the opposite party company and as per the complainant he was away from the station because of the treatment of cancer. That matter was also not challenged by the opposite party.
Hence the petition allowed. The opposite parties are restrained from disconnecting the electrical connection of the complainant, in his 6 room line quarters issued by the opposite party until the disposal of the industrial dispute pending before the Deputy Labour Officer, Munnar as ID No.460/2009 and the other suits before the Munsiff Court, Devikulam as OS 5/2011 and 293/2010.
(cont....6)
- 6 -
The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- to the complainant as cost of this petition within 30 days of receipt of a copy of this order failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 28th day of April, 2011
Sd/-
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
Sd/-
SMT.SHEELA JACOB (MEMBER)
Sd/-
SMT. BINDHU SOMAN (MEMBER)
APPENDIX
Depositions :
On the side of the Complainant :
PW1 - S. Guruswamy
On the side of the Opposite Party :
DW1 - S.P. Muthiah
Exhibits :
On the side of the Complainant :
Ext.P1 - Copy of the Pendency certificate issued by the Deputy Labour Officer, Munnar.
Ext.P2 - True copy of the banker's cheque for Rs.1000/- dated 16.9.2010.
Ext.P3 - Copy of the letter issued by the complainant with the postal receipt.
Ext.P4 - The letter issued by the opposite party dated 12.10.2010.
Ext.P5 - Copy of the letter issued by the complainant dated 23.10.2010.
Ext.P6 - Copy of the letter issued by the opposite party dated 6.1.2011.
Ext.P7 - Notary attested copy of the pay slip of the complainant dated 19.5.2000.
Ext.P8(series) - Notary attested copy of the pay slip for April, 2002 and June, 2002.
Ext.P9(a) - Copy of the complaint filed by the complainant to the Sub Inspector of Police,
Munnar.
Ext.P9(b) - Copy of the letter issued by the General Secretary of Workers Congress, Munnar,
to the Sub Inspector of Police, Munnar dated 10.3.2010.
Ext.P9(c) - Copy of the receipt from the police station for the Ext.P9(a) complaint.
Ext.P9(d) - Copy of the complaint filed by the complainant to the S.I of Police, Munnar
dated 14.10.2010.
Ext.P9(e) - Copy of the complaint filed by the complainant to the S.I of Police, Munnar
dated 7.12.2010.
Ext.P10(series) - The notary attested copy of the Provident Fund Annual Statements issued from
the opposite party.
(cont....7)
- 7 -
Ext.P11 - Copy of the receipt for the PF contribution of the complainant.
Ext.P12 - Copy of the driving licence of the complainant.
Ext.P13 - The copy of the letter given by the Deputy Manager – SIPD Finance, Tata Tea
Ltd Soumen Bose to the complainant for getting the car pass in Alwaye
railway station.
Ext.P14 - Copy of the letter to the employer to deduct the premium of the policy of the
complainant from his salary.
Ext.P15 - Copy of the FI statement of the Munnar Police made against the complainant.
On the side of the Opposite Party :
Ext.R1(series) - Copy of salary slips of the employees of the opposite party.
Ext.R2(series) - Copy of salary slip of the employees of the opposite party.
Ext.R3(series) - Computer print copies of the electricity charge of the bungalow servants.
Ext.R4(series) - Copies of recovery bills of the electricity charges from the opposite party.
Ext.R5 - Copy of the attendance check list of the complainant for June-2009.
Ext.R6 - The letter issued by DW1 stating to stop the attendance of the complainant
from 11 June, 2009 onwards.
Ext.R7 - The letter issued by the opposite party to appoint Mr.Murugan as the
bungalow servant of the opposite party.
Ext.R8 - Copy of the medical check up conducted on Mr.Murugan.
Ext.R9 - Copy of the attendance check list of Mr.Murugan for September-2009.
Ext.R10 - Copy of the attendance check list of Mr.Murugan for October-2009.
Ext.R11 - Copy of the FIR prepared by Munnar Police.
Ext.R12 - Copy of the plaint filed by the complainant before the Munsiff Court, Devikulam.
Ext.R13 - Copy of the suit filed by the opposite party before the Munsiff Court, Devikulam.
Ext.R14 - Copy of the medical check up certificate of the complainant.
Ext.R15(series)- Copy of salary slips of the employees of the opposite party.
Ext.R16(series)- The attendance register of the complainant.