West Bengal

Dakshin Dinajpur

CC/29/2020

Sri Goutam Paul. S/O- Lt. Gobinda Paul - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Station Manager, WBSEDCL Kumarganj CCC - Opp.Party(s)

Debraj Chakraborty

28 Mar 2023

ORDER

The instant case has been initiated by the complainant U/S – 12 of C.P. Act,1986 against the Opposite Parties claiming  for new electric connection + compensation of  Rs. 60,000/- .

     The fact of the case, in brief, is that the Complainant made an application before the electricity office at Kumarganj CCC for a new electric connection for the submersible pump. On receiving letter from the electric office, the Complainant duly deposited the earnest money by receipt no.126800898833 dated 08.01.2015 of Rs.200/-, paid security deposit Rs.3295/- by receipt no.700042851137 dated 17.08.2016 and paid for quotation service charges Rs. 3800/- by receipt no.127502166647 dated 17.08.2016. On 27.12.2016, the Complainant made prayer to the Kumarganj CCC for effecting LT Line from STW 25 KVA transformer of Manika Pal for which the Complainant has already effected 4 nos. of LT Pole for the connection from the nearby KVA transformer to enjoy the power. The Opposite Parties being misguided or misconceived did not effect the electric connection for which the standing crops destroyed due to insufficient irrigation and suffered a loss of Ra.50,000/-. The Opposite Parties by a letter memo no.KMJ/CCC/10 dated 01.04.2019 advised the Complainant to submit No Objection/Way Leave/Alternative way to draw LT Line to effect new STW connection against application no.4001255184 under the Opposite Party No.1. The Complainant has further stated that though the Opposite Parties have their own execution provision but  deliberately they did not affect the electric connection despite of receiving huge amount from the Complainant. For this, the Complainant filed an application on 17.09.2019 before the Assistant Director, Consumer Affaire & FBP but no result. The Opposite Party No.3 has been intentionally disturbing the Complainant to get the electric connection. The Complainant is suffering mental pain and agony. There is deficiency on the part of the Opposite Parties. Having no alternative, the Complainant has filed the instant case for relief as prayed for in the plaint.

              Notice was duly served upon the opposite Parties and after receiving the notice, the Opposite Parties No.1&2 appeared before this commission and filed their  written version. The Opposite Party No.3   refused the notice to receive so, the case is proceeded ex parte against him.

By filing written version, the opposite Party has denied the allegation that there is deficiency on the part of the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party has submitted that the Complainant applied for new STW connection against application no.4001255184 and deposited quotation amount against ref.con id no.401708934 under Kumarganj CCC. During the survey, the Complainant confirmed the way leave of LT Line from the nearest existing 25 KVA DTR to effect the new STW connection and accordingly PO( WORK ORDER) issued to effect the new STW connection after getting approval of higher authority. The Pole erection work has already completed as per order along with all fittings to effect the STW connection I.R.O. Goutam Paul but the connection could not be effected due to objection of Nikhil Paul and othersand it became disputed which was informed to the Complainant to clear the land dispute immediately vide memo.no.kmj/ccc/10 dated 01.04.2020 but the Complainant failed to solve the local problem. There is no deficiency in service or negligency on the part of the Opposite Parties so, the instant case is liable to be dismissed.   

To prove his case, the complainant has filed photo copies of -

(i) Application before the AD, Consumers Affairs & FBP

(ii) Some money receipt

(iii) Quotation

(iv) Letter dated 27.12.2016 submitted by the Complainant before Kumarganj CCC 

           (v) Letter dated 10.08.2018 submitted by the Complainant before Kumarganj CCC 

(vi) Letter of Kumarganj CCC dated 01.04.2019 sent to the Complainant.

             On the other hand, the Opposite Parties have failed to file any documents in support of their defense.    

 

 

In view of the above mentioned facts, the following points are cropped up for consideration   

 

 

 

POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION 

         

          1.  Whether the Complainant is a consumer to the Opposite Party?

          2.  Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

          3.  Whether the Complainant is entitled to get any relief/reliefs as prayed for? 

 

 

DECISION  WITH  REASONS

 

              We have heard arguments by Ld. Advocate for the Complainant and Ld. Advocates for the Opposite Parties No.1&2 at length. We have also gone through the written examination – in – chief and written arguments filed by both the parties as well as the documents produced by the Complainant.          

          At the time of argument, Ld. Advocate for the Complainant narrated the facts of the case as mentioned in the complaint and submitted that the. Opposite Party No.3 has been intentionally disturbing the Complainant without any reason. For that reason he did not appear before this Commission to contest the case and refused the service of notice. There is deficiency in service on the part of thew Opposite Party so, the petition should be allowed.     

          On the other hand, Ld. Advocate for the Opposite Parties No.1&2 also discussed their defense case and submitted that as the Complainant failed to provide way leave or no objection to the Opposite Parties No.1&2, the Opposite Parties No.1&2 could not affect the said connection. The Opposite Parties No.1&2 are always ready to effect electric connection if the Complainant provide police assistance. There is no question of compensation. Hence, the case is liable to be dismissed . 

             Now, let us discuss all the points one by one. 

 

Point No. 1   

 

          On perusal of materials on record, it appears that the Complainant, in terms of quotation has paid a sum of Rs./- 3295/- as security deposit and  service connection charge of Rs.3800/- on 17.08.2016 on proper receipt. By this way the Complainant has became consumer to the Opposite Parties No.1&2 under the provision section 2(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

         Accordingly, this point is decided in favor of the Complainant.  

 

 

 

 

 

Point Nos. 2 & 3  

 

           Both these points are taken up together for discussion for the sake of convenience and brevity.  

           On perusal of the receipt of payment of earnest money of Rs.200/-, security deposit of Rs.3295/- and payment of quotation money of Rs.3800/-, it is crystal clear that the Complainant has fulfilled the formalities before the Opposite Parties No.1&2 for getting electric connection for his submersible pump for irrigation purpose. This fact has also not been denied by the Opposite Parties No.1&2. It also appears that the men and agent of the Opposite Parties No.1&2 had gone to the place of occurrence to get effected the electric connection but when the Opposite Party No.3 i.e. Nikhil Paul raised objection and create obstruction to the men and agent of the Opposite Parties No.1&2, they could not  get effected the electric connection. The Opposite Party No.3 has been made party to this case and notice was sent to him but he refused to receive and did not appear before this Commission. This conduct of the Opposite Party No.3 shows that intentionally and for illegal gain he is raising objection.   Considering all aspect of the case, it appears that the electricity, in the modern period has became part and parcel of the life of a man so, the WBSEDCL is duty bound to effect electric connection to the Complainant with the assistance of the police specially when the electric connection is required for irrigation purpose and the police personals must assist the Opposite Parties No.1&2 for this against the GDE dated 17.05.2019 lodged by Opposite Parties regarding the incident.   

           In view of the above mentioned discussions, it is clear that the Complainant is a bona-fide consumer to the Opposite Parties but there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties

 

Accordingly, point no.2 is decided in favor of the Opposite Party and the Point no.3 is decided in favor of the Complainant.

 

 

 

 

 

Hence, it is

                                         

                                                            O R D E R E D

           

          That the Consumer Case No. 29 of 2020 is allowed on contest in part but without cost. 

           The Opposite Party is directed to effect electric connection within thirty (30) days in the place of occurrence of the Complainant from the date of passing of this order with the assistance of the Police of Kumarganj P.S. 

         The Officer-in-charge, of Kumarganj P.S. is directed to assist the Opposite Party for effecting electric connection in the place of occurrence of the Complainant by providing police personals .The Opposite Party is further directed to consult with the O/C Kumarganj P.S. and fix a date for giving effect the electric connection to the complaint.  The Complainant is directed to bear the cost of the police personals.  In the event of failure of giving effect the electric connection by the Opposite Parties to the complainant within the prescribed period, the complainant is at liberty to execute the order according to law.

             Let a plain copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.