DATE OF FILING : 26.09.2014.
DATE OF S/R : 24.11.2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 15.12.2015.
Smt. Punam Singh,
wife of Sri Bhagwan Singh,
residing at 146, ‘C’ Road, Bamungachi, P.S. Liluah,
District Howrah. ……………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.
1. The WBSEDCL,
having its office at Bidyut Bhavan, Bidhan Nagar,
Kolkata 700064.
2. The Station Manager,
WBSEDCL, having its office at Balitikuri,
33/11, KV/SUB STNCOMPLEX, H.I.E. Balitikuri, P.S. Dasnagar,
District Howrah,
PIN 711113.
3. Smt. Mira Devi,
wife of Sri Foudar Prajapati
of 146, ‘C’ Road, Bamungachi, P.S. Liluah,
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 petitioner, Smt. Punam Singh, against the o.p. nos. 1 & 2, WBSEDCL and another, praying for direction upon the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 to install new meter in the premises of the petitioner at 146, ‘C’ Road, Bamungachi, P.S. Liluah, with police assistance.
- The case of the petitioner is that she is a tenant in respect of one room at premises no. 146, ‘C’ Road, Liluah, at a monthly rental of Rs. 225/- including electricity charge as per english calendar month under the o.p. no. 3. The petitioner applied for separate electric connection in her rented accommodation and the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 asked her to deposit the earnest money and he deposited the same on 25.03.2013 but they did not give connection. Inspection was held on 28.6.2014 and a quotation bill dated 28.6.2014 was deposited by the petitioner for Rs. 972/- on 19.7.2014 but the connection not given and meter not installed in the premises on 12.8.2014 though the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 came to her premises for giving new connection but the o.p. no. 3 objected and so they could not install the meter and give connection. Being a tenant the petitioner is entitled to have electricity and she cannot be deprived of the same by o.p. nos. 1 & 2. Thus the case was filed by her.
- The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 appeared in the case and submitted that the complainant residing at the tenanted premises and in collusion with the o.p. no. 3 made out this concocted story being a false case. Being obstructed they could not give connection through passage used by the o.p. no. 3. So there is no negligence on their part. The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 could not get free access and so they failed to give connection and they are always ready and willing to discharge their duty. The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 submitted that to induct a sub tenant the petitioner filed this case which be dismissed.
- The o.p. no. 3 appeared in the case and filed written version denying the allegations made against her and submitted that the petitioner is a tenant at a rental of Rs. 225/- per month including electricity and so the petitioner has no right to take separate electric meter and the petitioner is not in dire need of electricity and also the petitioner is not a consumer.
- Upon pleadings of parties the following points arose for determination :
- Whether the case is 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. nos. 1 & 2, WBSEDCL?
- 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 support her case the petitioner deposited her identity card and also documents showing that she deposited the earnest money and other and filed documents to that effect. The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 did not provide her connection and so she filed this case. This Forum considered all aspects of the matter and keeping in mind the submissions of the ld. counsel of all sides and the petition, written version and the documents filed therein this Forum finds that petitioner being a tenant has every right to have water and electricity for maintenance of her livelihood. Light and water are the essential amenities in our civilized society.
In view of above all the issues are decided in favour of the complainant.
Court fee paid is correct.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 538 of 2014 ( HDF 538 of 2014 ) be and the same is allowed on contest without costs against the O.P. nos. 1 & 2 and o.p. no. 3.
The petitioner is entitled to get electricity as prayed for and the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 being the service provider are directed to give fresh connection and install meter in the premises of the petitioner through the passage without hindering the to and fro movement of the o.p. no. 3 who would not obstruct the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 while giving such connection.
The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 is to render such connection and install meter within 30 days from the date of this order failing due to any obstruction either the petitioner or the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 is to approach the I/C, local P.S. for assistance to execute the final order.
The o.ps. failing to comply the order, the petitioner would be at liberty to put the order in execution.
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Spply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( B. D. Nanda )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
