West Bengal

Jalpaiguri

CC 52/2014

Navin Bansal - Complainant(s)

Versus

West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sukanta Sarkar

01 Jul 2015

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, JALPAIGURI
JALPAIGURI
 
Complaint Case No. CC 52/2014
 
1. Navin Bansal
S/O Ashoke Bansal, residing at 14 Rashik Lal Ghosh Sarani, Mahanandapara, Siliguri, Proprietor of M/S Laxmi Trading Co. 2027/1. Haiderpara, Himachal Sarani. Siliguri, Dist.-Jalaiguri 743001
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited
Through Assistant Engineer and Station Manager, Hakimpara Customer Care Centre, Siliguri, Pin 734001
2. The Assistant Engineer and Station Manager, West Bengal State Electricity Distribution
Hakimpara Customer Care Centre, Siliguri, Pin-734001
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MS. Bina Choudhuri PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Prabin Chettri MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

Order No. -19                                                                                                                      Dt.-01/07/2015

Smt. Bina Choudhuri, Member

 

              This is an application u/s 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986.

               The brief fact of the complainant is that the complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties. The opposite party West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited installed a new electric connection in the premeses of the complainant being holding no.2027/1, Hyder para, Himachal Sarani, Siliguri as per prayer of the complainant dt. 29/03/2014, after making inspection in the aforesaid premises receiving the quotation amount of Rs.8,534.00 on 02/04/2014 from the complainant. But surprisingly on 12/04/2014 the opposite party disconnected the aforesaid electric connection which was installed on 09/04/2014 in the aforesaid premises on the false allegation that the premises is a defaulted  one due to non-payment of bill against Consumenr ID 41205860 and issued a letter on 12/04/2014 to the complainant alleging that at the time of inspection, the complainant has given declaration that there is no service connection lying disconnected for any outstanding amount. Subsequently the complainant submitted two representation on 17/04/2014 and on 05/05/2014 intimating that the electric line has been disconnected on false allegation of defaulter. Thereafter the complainant came to learn that a case has been stated against father of the consumer in premises no.123/1, Hyderpara, Siliguri . But the complainant had been residing in the said premeses and for long time is no connection with the said defaulted premises. The acts of the O.Ps. are gross negligence and deficiency in service towards the complainant. Hence this case.      

The O.Ps. have contested this case by filing Written version denying and disputing the claims and contentions of the complainant with prayer for dismissal of the case.

The specific stand of the O.P. is that the Ld. Forum has no jurisdiction to pass any such declaration as sought for in the prayer of the petition and also no jurisdiction to try the case since the matter involves theft of energy. The complainant is a defaulter and guilty of giving false declaration and it is settled Law that if any person takes connection by giving false declaration his connection is liable to be disconnected forthwith and any dispute new service connection, the same shall be adjudicated by the OMBUDSMAN created by statute and lastly the O.P. states that the complainant is not a consumer as per C.P.Act since he takes the connection under commeccial category and runs the factory by engaging a good number of labourers and employees in a defected premises.

 

POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION.

1.Is the case maintainable as alleged ?

2.Is the complainant a consumer as per C.P.Act?

  1. Are the O.Ps. guilty for deficiency in service and Unfair Trade Practice as alleged?
  2. Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?

DECISION  WITH  REASONS

             All four points are taken up together for consideration and decision for the sake of convenience.

             Seen and perused the petition of complaints, W/V filed by the O.Ps. and written arguments and documents filed by both parties.

              Now after due consideration of arguments advanced by the Ld. Lawyers of both parties and the materials on record we find that admittedly the O.Ps. installed a new connection on 09/04/2014 vide Consumer ID 400919564 at premises Himachal Sarari, Haider Para, Siliguri, issuing Meter card being Meter no.-331389(1), commercial category in the name of the complaiannt. Admittedly in the ‘Inspection report for New Service Connection’ in Column 21 complainant has signed a self declaration that, “I, the applicant/representative do hereby declare that there is/ was no service connection lying disconnected for any outstanding amount or for any other reasons what so ever or receiving power previously/presently from any such disconnected service line to the premises where applied for new service connection. Any wrong informationfound in future my service connection may be disconnected by WBSEDCL for which I will raise no objection”.

                From materials on record we find that the O.Ps.served a notice to the complainant on 12/04/2015 informing about premises in defaulted one due to non-payment of final assesment bill amounting to Rs.5,37713.00 against Consumer ID 412058560 and also about false declaration given at the time of effecting the new service connection, on account of which the service line was disconnected on 12/04/2014. Therefore it is clear that there is no alleged deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. for disconnectionthe line of the complainantas the father of the complainant is a defaulter in the same premises and the complainant also took electric connectiongiving false declaration and a case of theft of energy is pending against the father of the complainant. So the complainant being a legal heir/son against whom a criminal case is pending for theft of energy and non-payment of electrical dues cannot get new connection and knowing this well the complainant took new connection suppressing the aforesaid fact. That apart the comp[lainant didn’t make any appeal before “OMBUDSMAN” for his redressal. Lastly and finally in respect of prayer for declaration that the premises is a non-defaulted premises, this Forum has no power or jurisdiction to pass any order for declaration because the Consumer Court cannot take over the functions of the Civil Court.

                      In this view of the matter question of deficiency in service and Unfair Trade Practice by the O.Ps. as alleged donot arise at all and the complainant is not entitled to get any relief.  

                     All four points are disposed of .

          In the result the case/application fails.       

          Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

                     that the case stands dismissed being not maintainable, on contest but in the circumstances we make no order as to cost.

                     Let copy of this final order be supplied to the parties free of cost forthwith in terms of Rule.5(10) of West Bengal Consumer Protection Rules 1987.         Sd/-                                          

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MS. Bina Choudhuri]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. Prabin Chettri]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.