Sri Chunilal Seal,
14, Karl Marx Sarani, Kolkata-700023. ---------- Complainant
1) District Engineer, South West Dist., CESC Ltd.,
P-18, Taratalla Road, Kol-88.
2) Sri Kapilmuni Gupta,
14, Karl Marx Sarani, Kolkata-700023.
3) Sri Paresh Nath Gupta,
14, Karl Marx Sarani, Kolkata-700023. --------- Opposite Party
Complainant Sri Chunilal Seal, by filing a petition of complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 on 11.11.08 has prayed for issuing direction upon o.p. no.1 to install a new electric meter in the name of the complainant at the premises no.14, Karl Marx Sarani, P.S. Watgunj, Kolkata-23 or in the common meter room of the premises and issuing further direction upon o.p. no.2 for arranging space for installation of a new meter in the name of the complainant at the demarcated portion of the o.p. no.2 as the space is not available within the demarcated portion of the o.p. no.2. The new meter may be installed in the tenanted portion of the complainant and issuing further direction upon o.p. nos.2 and 3 restraining them from raising any objection in the name of the complainant by o.p. no.1 and any other relief or reliefs as the complainant is entitled to.
Specific case of the complainant is that at a monthly rental of Rs.600/- he is a tenant in respect of the shop room under o.p. no.2 on the south eastern portion or front portion of the premises no.14, Karl Marx Sarani, P.S. Watgunj, Kolkata-23. He runs a garment business in the said shop room for his livelihood by means of self employment. Landlord o.p. no.2 initially gave permission for installation of a separate meter in the name of complain ant on the western portion of the said premises where all meters are maintained and accordingly the complainant applied for a separate meter on depositing fees to the extent of Rs.1140/- out of Rs.840/- for security deposit and Rs.300/- for service charge on 26.2.08.
But the complainant was denied by a lady officer of CESC representing o.p. no.1 to get a new meter in his name because huge amount is due payable to CESC Ltd. in respect of the said premises and complainant was directed to clear at least one unpaid bill. Under compelling circumstances, complainant was forced to deposit Rs.5090/- against an unpaid bill vide annex-C. On 3.3.01 CESC personnel visited the said premises for inspection and it is found that all the meters of the premises are lying on the west portion of the premises in the meter room. Unfortunately on 6.3.08 the CESC by a letter expressed their inability to install a new meter in the name of the complainant as objection was given by o.p. no.3. O.p. no.2 also raised objection and o.p. no.3 in collusion with o.p. no.2 filed T.S. No.1817 of 2008 before the 5th Civil Judge, Junior Division, against the complainant and they also prayed for injunction against the complainant.
It has further been contended that the complainant is a young man and the garment shop is the only source of his livelihood. And for want of a separate meter he has been sustaining great loss and accordingly, finding no other alternative he has filed this case with the aforesaid prayer.
O.p. no.1 in their w/v filed on 11.6.09 has challenged the maintainability of this case and they also alleged that it is the dispute between the complainant and o.p. nos.2 and 3. And it has been found on scrutiny of their official record that the meter could not be installed in the name of the petitioner, Chunilal Seal, as objection was raised by o.p. no.3.
O.p. no.3 Paresh Nath Gupta also filed his w/v on 11.6.09 wherein he has admitted that the complainant is a tenant in the said premises and he has also stated about the T.S. No.64 of 2003 and T.S. No.26 of 2003 and there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the complainant and o.p. no.3. He has also annexed a letter, annex-A, of his w/v, written by Kapilmuni Gupta, o.p. no.2 addressed to him.
Decision with reasons :
Admittedly, complainant Chunilal Seal is a tenant in the premises in question under o.p. no.2, Kapilmuni Gupta. Further admitted position is that the complainant applied for a separate metre to the CESC, o.p. no.1 by depositing Rs.1140/- and that the CESC personnel inspected the premises in question. It is the specific case of the CESC, o.p. no.1, that only due to the dispute between o.p. nos.2 and 3, they are unable to install separate meter in the name of the complainant, Chunilal Seal. It further appears from annex-A of w/v of o.p. no.3 wherein it has been clearly stated which runs as “the consent has been given to Chunilal Seal for installing electric meter in any portion”. Admittedly and evidently, therefore, a separate meter can be installed by o.p. no.1 in the name of the petitioner on a portion of the premises free from all disputes, controversies and illegalities.
It has been keenly submitted by the ld. Lawyer for the complainant that a sympathetic consideration should be taken as because he is earning his livelihood only on the basis of this garment shop. And his earning from the garment shop is expected to be higher during the ensuing Durga Puja festival. And if he does not have a meter of his own, his earning may suffer a lot. We find merit in the submission of the ld. Lawyer of the complainant. Having due regard to the circumstances and more particularly, when o.p. no.2 the landlord has given consent for installation of an electric meter in the name of the complainant in his portion as reflected in annex-A of the w/v of o.p. no.3, in that event, we are of the opinion that the petition of complaint should be allowed.
That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest. The o.p. no.1 is directed to install a new electric meter in the name of the complainant Sri Chunilal Seal, provisionally within fifteen days from the date of communication of this order either in the demarcated portion of o.p. no.2 or in the common place where other meters are installed.
This order does not stand in the proceedings of T.S. No.1817 of 2008. Fees paid are correct. Accordingly, the case is finally disposed of from this forum.
Copy of this order be supplied to the parties on payment of prescribed fees.