DATE OF FILING : 26.03.2015.
DATE OF S/R : 20.05.2015.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 15.10.2015.
Bijoy Bag,
son of late Kartik Chandra Bag,
residing at 33/12, Fakir Chand Ghosh, P.O. Chatterjeehat,
District Howrah………………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.
1. District Engineer,
CESC Ltd.,
having its office at 433/1, G.T. Road ( N ),
District Howrah,
PIN 711101.
2. Ajoy Bag,
son of late Kartick Chandra Bag.
3. Amrita Bag,
wife of Sri Ajoy Bag.
4. Smt. Prafulla Bag,
wife of late Kartick Chandra Bag.
5. Smt. Usha Das,
daughter of late Kartick Chandra Bag,
all are residing at 33/12, Fakir Chand Ghosh, P.S. Chatterjeehat,
District Howrah,
PIN 711104…...……………………………………………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, Bijoy Bag, against the o.p. no. 1, CESC Ltd., and four others, praying for a direction upon the o.p. no. 1, District Engineer, CESC Ltd., 433/1, G.T. Road ( North ), Howrah, to render new electric connection at the meter board of the petitioner with the help of local police station and to direct the o.p. nos. 2 to 5 not to obstruct the o.p. no. 1 in rendering such supply and also pay compensation for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- and litigation costs of Rs. 5,000/-.
- The case of the petitioner is that he is a consumer under the o.p. no. 1 residing at premises no. 33/12, Fakir Chand Ghosh, P.S. Chatterjeehat, District Howrah, since the time of his father after making construction he had good relation with the o.p. nos. 2 to 5 but after demise of his father the o.p. no. 2 to 5 have been trying to oust him from his occupied portion wherein he has been living with the permission of his father. On 02.02.2015 he applied for electricity and the o.p. no. 1 while holding inspection the o.p. nos. 2 to 5 raised objection. The o.p. no. 1 in collusion with other o.ps. neglecting to provide electric connection and also delaying the matter compelling the petitioner to file the case.
- The o.p. nos. 4 & 5 being the brother and sister of petitioner contested the case by filing a written version denying the allegations made against them and submitted that the case be dismissed as the petitioner is a licensee.
4. The o.p. no. 1, CESC Ltd., by filing a separate written version denying the allegations made against them and submitted that the inspection in the said premises could not be done as the access to the meter board was not made available due to objection by o.p. no. 2, Ajoy Bag and others. The o.p. no. 1 being a public utility concern is always eager to cater the supply but could not do the same and so no latches on the part of the o.p. no. 1.
5. In spite of service of notice, the o.p. nos. 2 & 3 did not appear in the case and file any written version and thus the case is heard ex parte against them.
6. On the above cases of the parties the following issues are framed :
- 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. no. 1, 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 support of his case the petitioner, Bijoy Bag, submitted before the Forum one copy of the letter dated 20.02.2015 written to him by District Engineer, CESC Ltd., which proved the fact that he is an occupier in the premises no. 33/12, Fakir Chand Ghosh, P.S. Chatterjeehat, District Howrah, and it is true that he applied for electricity and the CESC Authority is unable to supply fresh connection to the petitioner due to obstruction by o.p. nos. 2 to 5. The o.p. no. 1, CESC Ltd., is always ready and willing to render such electric connection and there is no deficiency in service on their part. Had there been no obstruction from o.p. nos. 2 to 5 who are all brothers and sisters of the petitioner, the CESC could render connection and this case could not been filed before this Forum. This Forum finds no reason that a man is to live in the modern days without light and water and thus the petitioner is entitled to get new electricity connection.
In the result, the application succeeds.
Court fee paid is correct.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 121 of 2015 ( HDF 121 of 2015 ) be and the same is allowed on contest against o.p. nos. 1, 4 & 5 and ex parte against o.p. nos. 2 & 3 without costs.
The petitioner is entitled to get fresh electric connection in his premises at 33/12, Fakir Chand Ghosh, P.S. Chatterjeehat, District Howrah,, and the o.p. no. 1, CESC Ltd., is directed to render such electric connection to the petitioner within 30 days from the date of this order and in case of any obstruction by o.p. nos. 2 to 5, the petitioner as well as o.p. no.1 would approach local p.s. for their assistance during rendering such connection.
As regards compensation and litigation costs, this Forum passes no order as no evidence in support of such mental torture or trauma and also cost for filing the proceeding.
The o.p. no. 1 not complying the order of the Forum within the stipulated period, 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.
