DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA.

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 71 of 2021.

 

1. Sri Abhijit Baishya,

S/O. Lt. Hari Bhakta Baishya,

R/O. Vill & P.O.-Kanchanmala,

P.S.-Amtali P.S. 

Dist.-West Tripura,

Pin-799130.............................................................Complainant.

 

 

-VERSUS-

 

 

1. Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd.

Represented by CMD,

“Bidyut Bhawan”, Banamalipur,

P.S.-West Agartala,

Dist-West Tripura, Pin-799001.

 

2. The Senior Manager, 

Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd.

Electrical Sub-Division Sekherkote,

P.S.-Amtali P.S.,

Dist.-West Tripura, Pin-799130............................Opposite parties.

 

      __________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

DR (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA. 

 

C O U N S E L

 

For the Complainant : Sri  Bikram Paul,

  Smt. Debashree Das(Kilikdar),

  Advocates. 

 

For the O.Ps. : Sri Nepal Majumdar,

  Advocate.

 

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON: 29/06/2022.

J U D G M E N T

The Complainant Sri Abhijit Baishya, set the law in motion by presenting the petition U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 complaining deficiency of service committed by the O.Ps. 

  The complainant's case, in brief, is that the Complainant in the year 2019 purchased a plot of land and after getting permission he wanted to start construction over the purchased land for residential purpose and for this aforesaid reason the Complainant has prayed before the O.P. No.2 for temporary electric connection at his construction site situated at Chowmoni Bazar, West Tripura. Accordingly as per guidance of Office of the O.P. No.2, on 16/01/2021 the Complainant vide receipt No.027872 & 027873 dated 16/01/2021 has deposited in the office of the O.P. No.2 Rs.600/- for temporary connection and Rs.1,800/- as Load Advance, in total Rs.2,400/- for the period of 17/01/2021 to 16/02/2021. The Complainant was also informed from the office of the O.P. No.2 that after payment of the temporary connection charges, a temporary connection with an electric sub-meter shall be provided at the complainant's address within next day but they did not appear on that day at the address of the Complainant and thus no temporary connection was given to the Complainant. The Complainant again pursued several times in the office of the O.P. No.2 for his temporary connection but the O.P. No.2 did not paid any heed to his request and no temporary connection was provided to the Complainant. The Office staffs of the O.P. No.2 told the Complainant that his prayer for temporary connection dated 16/01/2021 was valid from 17/01/2021 to 16/02/2021 and on that day it's duration already elapsed. The Office staffs also told that the Complainant should deposit the required charges again in the Office of the O.P. No.2 and then only the Complainant will be provided a temporary connection. On 16/03/2021 finding no other alternative the Complainant vide receipt no. 027709 & 027710 dated 16/03/2021 deposited Rs.600/- for temporary connection and Rs.1,800/- as Load Advance, in total Rs.2,400/- in the office of the O.P. No.2. Second time the Complainant has paid the charges for getting temporary connection for the period 15/03/2021 to 13/04/2021. Even after the second time payment of charges for obtaining the temporary electric connection, the officials of O.P. No.2 did not provide any temporary electrical connection with sub-meter at Complainant's construction site. Thereafter, the Complainant to continue the construction work had taken help from one of the neighbour namely Sri Tinku Das, S/O. Lt.l Amulya Das, R/O. Chowmoni Bazar, West Tripura. The said Sri Tinku Das provided the Complainant electric connection. On 28/06/2021, being dissatisfied with the service of the O.Ps. the complaint though his engaged Counsel sent legal notice to the O.Ps. demanding the refund of the charges which he had deposited for temporary electric connection. The said notice was delivered to O.P. No.1 on 30/06/2021 and to O.P. No.2 on 01/07/2021 which the complaint came to know from the letter dated 22/07/2021 issued by the Post Master, Agartala Head Post Office. But O.Ps. did not bother to refund the amount which they have received. The complainant suffered mental agony due to deficiency service committed by the O.Ps.

Being aggrieved by the conduct of the O.Ps., the Complainant has filed present complaint praying for compensation for mental agony, harassment and for deficiency of service by the O.Ps.   

Hence this case. 

Both the O.Ps have contested the complaint by filing written objection jointly denying the contentions and the allegations of the complainant. 

        In the written objection it is submitted that the Complainant unnecessarily filed the false and fabricated complaint against the answering O.Ps. with ulterior motive.  O.P. No.2 stated that on the basis of the prayer of the Complainant the temporary connection during the period from 17/01/2021 to 16/02/2021 was permitted and installed in the premises of the Complainant and the Complainant used and enjoyed the Electricity. Labourers are also the witnesses in this issue to the actual fact that, the Complainant used electricity and his construction work ran smoothly during that period. The Complainant mis-leaded the Ld. Commission. The O.P. No.2 further submitted that on the basis of the prayer of the Complainant the temporary connection during the period from 15/03/2021 to 13/04/2021 was permitted and installed in the premises of the Complainant. The local people are the witnesses that, during the period from 15/03/2021 to 13/04/2021, the Complainant used the electricity and continued the construction work with the help of electricity and the labourers are also the witnesses in this issue to the actual fact. The O.P. No.2 stated that the Complainant mis-leaded the Ld. Commission.  Thereafter, O.P. No.2 and its team in physically caught red-handed the Complainant in use of electricity from the main line through the Hook line. On 24/04/2021 the O.P. No.2 imposed penalty as per Rules of Section 135(1) C (2) of Indian Electricity Act, 2003. It is well established that, the act of Complainant is punishable as per Rules of Section 135 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003 for drawing the illegal hook line from the main line. The O.P. No.2 further stated that the present complainant received the same by putting the signature and also recorded his phone number 9774163538. The name of the Complainant was registered in the office record and he has been imposed penalty of Rs.5,000/- for drawing Power illegally by means of Hook line. So there is no question of deficiency of service from the side of the O.Ps. and complaint petition is liable to be dismissed.      

3. Evidence adduced by the parties:-

The complainant examined himself as P.W.1. He has submitted two examination-in-Chief i.e. one for himself and another for Sri Tinku Das by way of Affidavit. In this case the complainant  produced 5 documents comprising 12 sheets under a Firisti dated 12/08/2021. The documents are copy of the Khatian of Sri Abhijit Baishya, Copy of money receipts, Copy of the legal notice dated 28/06/2021 along with postal tracking slips, Copy of the letter dated 23/07/2021 & Copy of the reply from the Post Master, Agartala Head Post Office. 

O.Ps. adduced evidence of one witness namely Sri Asis Nandi, Senior Manager, Sekerkote Electrical Sub-Division. O.Ps. did not produce any documents. 

4. Points to be determined:

  (i). Whether there was any deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps towards the complainant?     

         (ii). Whether the complainant is entitled to get any compensation /relief as prayed for ?                       

5. Arguments of both sides:

            At the time of argument both sides were absent. Subsequently Complainant submitted a written argument on 27/06/2022. No written argument is submitted by O.Ps.       

6. Decision and reasons for decision:-  

All the points are taken up together for the convenience for decision.  

    We have carefully gone through the pleadings  as well as evidences adduced from both sides. 

          On perusal of the Examination-in -Chief on Affidavit submitted by the Complainant, we find that on 16/01/2021 the Complainant vide receipt No.027872 & 027873 dated 16/01/2021 has deposited in the office of the O.P. No.2 Rs.600/- for temporary connection and Rs.1,800/- as Load Advance, in total Rs.2,400/- for the period of 17/01/2021 to 16/02/2021. The Complainant was also informed from the office of the O.P. No.2 that after payment of the temporary connection charges, a temporary connection with an electric sub-meter shall be provided at the complainant's address within next day but they did not appear on that day at the address of the Complainant and thus no temporary connection was given to the Complainant. On 16/03/2021 finding no other alternative the Complainant vide receipt no. 027709 & 027710 dated 16/03/2021 deposited Rs.600/- for temporary connection and Rs.1,800/- as Load Advance, in total Rs.2,400/- in the office of the O.P. No.2. Second time the Complainant has paid the charges for getting temporary connection for the period 15/03/2021 to 13/04/2021. Even after the second time payment of charges for obtaining the temporary electric connection, the officials of O.P. No.2 did not provide any temporary electrical connection with sub-meter at Complainant's construction site. Thereafter, the Complainant to continue the construction work had taken help from one of the neighbour namely Sri Tinku Das, S/O. Lt.l Amulya Das, R/O. Chowmoni Bazar, West Tripura. The said Sri Tinku Das provided the Complainant electric connection. On 28/06/2021, being dissatisfied with the service of the O.Ps. the complaint through his engaged Counsel sent legal notice to the O.Ps. demanding the refund of the charges which he had deposited for temporary electric connection. The said notice was delivered to O.P. No.1 on 30/06/2021 and to O.P. No.2 on 01/07/2021 which the complaint came to know from the letter dated 22/07/2021 issued by the Post Master, Agartala Head Post Office. 

        On the other hand OPW-1 namely Sri Asis Nandi, Sr. Manager of Sekerkote Electrical Sub-Division in his examination-in-chief on affidavit stated that instant complaint petition is not maintainable in facts as well as in law as Complainant suppressed the material facts. At Para No.6 OPW stated that Complainant was drawing an illegal hook line for the consumption of electricity for his construction work. The team of O.P. No.2 physically caught red-handed the Complainant while using hook line on 24/04/2021. The O.P. imposed penalty as per provision of Section 135(1) C(2) of Indian Electricity Act, 2003 for committing theft of electricity. Complainant was imposed penalty of Rs.5,000/-. At Para No.10 DW-1 stated that on the basis of prayer of the Petitioner the Temporary connection was installed  and Complainant used and enjoyed the Electricity and Complainant has misled the Learned Commission.                    

7. On perusal of the complaint as well as evidence adduced by the Complainant we find that Complainant has taken electricity from the house of the adjacent neighbour namely, Sri Tinku Das illegally. From the evidence of the O.Ps. we find that Complainant was caught red-handed at the time of committing theft of electricity by drawing a hook line but Complainant did not disclose the said fact in his complaint. From the evidence of OPW we find that the temporary connection was installed during the period from 17/01/2021 to 16/02/2021 and 15/03/2021 to 13/04/2021. OPW-1, Sri Asis Nandi is a responsible Officer holding the  post of Senior Manager at Sekerkote Electrical Sub-Division, so we can not disbelieve his testimony. Rather we find that Complainant has suppressed the material facts and also admitted that he has taken illegal Electricity connection from the house of Sri Tinku Das, the adjacent neighbour of the Complainant. Sri Tinku Das also in his deposition(PW-2) admitted that he agreed to help to the Complainant by giving electricity connection.   

 

8. On overall appreciation of the evidences of both sides, we found that Complainant has failed to prove the deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps. Moreover, we find that Complainant did not come with clean hands and suppressed material facts. 

Accordingly, we are in the opinion that Complainant has failed to prove his complaint U/S. 35 of the C.P. Act, 2019. 

Hence, the complaint is dismissed and no costs. 

Supply a certified copy of the judgment to both the parties free of cost. 

  Announced.

 

 

 

SRI  RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

 

DR (SMT)  BINDU  PAL

MEMBER, 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.