FINAL ORDER

Samaresh Kumar Mitra,Member.

     The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is a bonafide consumer under the O.P. No.1.  O.P. No.1 is a electric power distribution company under the Govt. of West Bengal.  The complainant applied for getting new electricity service connection from the O.P. No.1 in her name at her residential premises mentioned in the schedule.

            On the basis of the said application the O.P. No.1 vide their memo No.10109587/APP-REC/01 dated 18.08.2012 sent a booklet along with some documents to be filled  and to follow the procedure mentioned thereof and they further requested the complainant to pay earnest money of Rs.200/-.  The complainant paid earnest money to the O.P. No.1 on 11.9.2012 vide receipt No.3896 dated 11.9.2012 and submitted the same with the application.  The O.P. No.1 issued quotation bill dated 4.9.2012 in connection with giving new service connection to the premises of the complainant and thereby asked the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.821/- towards quotation fee.  The complainant paid quotation fees of Rs.821/- to the O.P. No.1 by two receipts being No.4588 and 4589 dated 24.11.2012.

            It would be mentioned here that the complainant acquired the schedule land by purchasing from the Ghosh family of Uttarpara.  While the complainant applied for electricity the said family started problem and as such the O.P. No.1 at the instigation of those family did not act accordingly nor giving electric connection in the premises of the complainant.

            The complainant applied for electric connection for the purpose of getting electricity at her residential premises.  Moreover, the complainant has her other family members and minor children including school-going children and as such electricity is very much required but due to avoidance on the part of the O.P. No.1, the complainant inspite of depositing necessary fees and documents following the instructions of the O.P. No.1 has not yet get the electricity connection at her premises.

            At the time of application the complainant submitted the Map of the Deed Plan wherefrom the electricity connection would be installed but the O.P. No.1 at  the behest of the aforesaid persons without making any initiation to provide electricity connection in favour of the complainant, sent a letter vide Memo No.MCC/NSC/1922 dated 20.2.2013.  The complainant visited O.P. No.1’s office several but no fruitful result comes out.  Moreover, the complainant filed M.P. Case No.536 of 2013 before the Court of Ld. SDEM, Serampore so that the aforesaid Ghosh family may not create disturbance at the time of giving electric connection and the Ld. Magistrate vide order dated 25.3.2013 directed the Electric Department to take necessary action after observing all the legal formalities.

            The said order also submitted to the competent authority i.e. O.P. No.1 but inspite of that the O.Ps. did not pay any heed to the same and complainant and her family members harassed day by day.  Finding no other alternative the complainant filed this case before this Ld. Forum for relief with the direction to the O.Ps. to install new electric connection in the premises of the complainant and to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental pain and agony.

            The O.P. No.1 & 2 contested the case by filing written version denying all the material allegations as leveled against them. These OPs. submit that the petitioner Usha Mahato applied for new electric connection in the premises on 11.09.2012 vide JL No.11, CS & RS Dag No.1995 corresponding to LR Dag No.2286, CS & RS Khatian No.438 & 103.  After inspection the O.P. No.1 issued quotation for PCC Poles (two numbers).  Thereafter one Animesh Ghosh & Ors. submitted an objection against the said new connection.  But the petitioner paid the quotation money on 24.11.2012 and as such this O.P. had sent authorized personnel to accomplish the job dated 17.12.2013.  But due to vehement physical obstruction accused by the said Ghosh family against installation of the said service connection, it could not been provided.  The Ghosh family shown the court case paper, so the representative of WBSEDCL returned without effecting service connection and it had been informed to the complainant vide letter dated 20.2.2013.

            Again after filing a criminal case U/s.144 Cr.PC by the complainant, the complainant submitted the said paper to this O.P. No.1.  After receiving the same the O.P. No.1 again took step by sending authorized persons but could not able to succeed by providing connection to the complainant with vehement obstruction by the Ghosh family of Animesh Ghosh & others.  Thereafter the complainant did not communicate of further proceeding.

            That there is no latches on the part of this O.P. and/or any deficiency of service in respect of non-effecting of electric new connection to the complainant.  Hence, the case.

            The O.P. No.3 also contested the case by filing written version denying the allegation as leveled against him.  This O.P. submit that complainant is nobody of the schedule property mentioned her complaint and she has no right, title, interest whatsoever on the schedule property.  This complainant suppressed the material facts and figures and the present position of the schedule property.  The complainant by filing false and fabricated story on  her complaint harassed this O.P. No.3 and other local inhabitants.

            It is also mentioned here that previously one Sandhya Das also filed such type of complaint before this Ld. Forum and after due hearing open the original truth and said complainant Sandhya Das compelled to withdraw the said case from this Ld. Court vide C.C. No.166/2013.

            This O.P. No.3 and other co-owners filed two Civil Suit before the Ld. 3^rd Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Serampore, Hooghly vide Title Suit No.133/2011 and before the Ld. Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Serampore vide T.S. No.508/2013 and both the cases the present complainant and other appeared before both the cases and after due hearing both the cases the Ld. Court passed the order to maintain status on the schedule property till disposal of the suit.

            The present complainant and her henchmen finding no other alternative suppressing the original truth and filed this complaint by taking electric energy from the WBSEDCL, which is absolutely bad in law and also the criminal offence.  This O.P. No.3 already informed to the WBSEDCL and others by stating all the facts and figures and also the order of the Ld. Civil Court through his Ld. Advocate.  This O.P. No.3 prayed before this Forum to dismiss the instant complaint.

The complainant filed evidence on affidavit which is nothing but the replica of complaint petition.  Argument advanced by the parties heard in full. They also filed the written notes of argument which are taken into consideration for passing final order.    

From the discussion herein above, we find the following Issues/Points for consideration.

ISSUES/POINTS   FOR   CONSIDERATION

 1. Whether the Complainant Smt. Usha Mahato ‘Consumer’ of the opposite party?

2. Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?

3. Whether the O.Ps carried on unfair trade practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?

4. Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?

DECISION WITH REASONS

   In the light of discussions here in above we find that the issues/points should be decided based on the above perspectives.

(1).Whether the Complainant ‘Usha Mahato’is a ‘Consumer’ of the opposite party?

     From the materials on record it is transparent that the Complainant by depositing the quotation money became the consumer of the OP as provided by the spirit of section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. 

     (2).Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?               Both the complainant and opposite party are residents/carrying on business within the district of Hooghly. The complaint valued within Rs.20,00,000/- limit of this Forum. So, this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case.  

    (3).Whether the opposite party carried on Unfair Trade Practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?

       The opposite party being the largest Electric Supply Company throughout the state having a  lot of offices, power stations, substations and power generating stations decorated with a lot of expert hands and running its business with goodwill for a long period and providing/rendering service for development of society as well as implementing a lot of Govt. Programs. So the role of OP Company for the development of the society is unquestionable.

      The O.P. herein is the Station Manager of an office of the largest electric supply company throughout the State of W.B. The Company WBSEDCL running its business throughout the state except territorial jurisdiction of Kolkata Corporation. The O.P. Company is providing power in the rural areas in different projects for a long period.  That is why the consumers in the rural areas are highly grateful to the Company. While providing powers throughout the state it also suffers from many discrepancies. Like not sending/ preparing bills in due time or sending bills for a period when the powers are discontinued and not taking reading regularly as a result the consumers suffer from paying accumulated units at a higher rate. As a consequence the consumers suffer a lot and make their grievances for remedy.

        It appears from the case record that the complainant paid the quotation money as issued by the OP in two heads i.e. security deposit & connection charge. Thereafter she visited the OP several times for getting electric connection in his premises but the OP could not effect the connection for a long time.  From the written version of the OP we come to know that the OP could not effect connection in the premises of the complainant as he faced obstruction from the end of Members of Ghosh family. The protestors also informed this OP that a title suit is pending before the Civil Court. For which the OP could not effectuate the connection so he has no deficiency in service towards the complainant.

         It appears from the case record that the complainant by depositing the quotation money became the consumer of the OP and visited the place of the OP several times for getting connection in his residential place. The OP in his written version admitted that he issued work order & erection work started for effectuate the connection but he failed to provide connection due to obstruction of Members of the Ghosh family adjacent to the complainant, who informed the O.P. No.1 that a Civil Suit is pending before the Civil Judge Jr. Divn, 3^rd Court, Serampore and Xerox copy of the plaint filed in the case record but no order in respect of the said Title Suit filed till date.  It appears from the plaint of the Civil Suit that this complainant is not among the plaintiff and defendants.  But from the persons from whom this complainant purchased the plot of land is the defendant. So, from the arena of Civil Suit pending before any court should not be impediment for getting power connection in the premises of this complainant.  And there is no order from the Civil Court restraining this O.P. to provide power to this complainant.  So, we may hold that the complainant being a consumer of the O.P. No.1 & 2 is entitled to get power which seems to be crying need at this point.  This complainant suffered for a prolonged period due to absence of electricity in his house.  She ran pillar to post for getting power in her residential place but the O.P. No.1 could not effectuate the said power connection in the precincts of this complainant owing to objection raised by the O.P. No.3 and others.  So, from the above discussions it is crystal clear that this complainant with the intent to get power being the basic need of human applied before the O.P. No.1 but her desire frustrated due to objection of neighbourers.  After getting no alternative she filed the instant complaint before this Forum for getting reliefs as prayed in the prayer portion of the complaint. 

      So we are in considered opinion to allow the complaint in part so that the OP can connect the power connection of this Complainant as early as possible with the help of police personnel if required.

4). Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?

        The discussion made herein before, we have no hesitation to come in a conclusion that the Complainant able to prove her case and the Opposite Party No. 1 & 2 are not liable to pay any compensation for deficiency of service as they tried their best to provide power to this complainant.

           Hence it is ordered that the complaint be and the same is allowed in part on contest with no order as to cost against the Opposite party No.1 & 2.

The OP No.1 & 2 are directed to connect the domestic connection in the residential place of this complainant as early as possible with the help of police personnel if required within 30 days from receiving this order and submit a report of connection in this Forum immediately.

The OP is at liberty to take the help of police personnel if required during the course of providing power connection in the premises of this complainant.

 No other reliefs are awarded to the complainant.

     At the event of failure to comply with the order the Opposite Party No.1 & 2 shall pay cost @ Rs.50/- for each day’s delay, if caused, on expiry of the aforesaid 30 days by depositing the accrued amount, if any,  in the fund of  “Consumer Legal Aid Account”.

Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their Ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/sent by ordinary post forthwith, for information & necessary action.

           Dictated and corrected by me. Samaresh Kr.  Mitra,Member, CDRF, Hooghly.