Presented by: -
Shri Debasish Bandyopadhyay, President.
Complaint Case No. 210/2021
This complaint case has been filed by the complainant against OPs for passing direction to the OP No. 1 to provide any electric connection in the name of the complainant in the schedule mentioned property and to restrain the OP Nos. 2 to 4 and their men and agents in the matter of providing electricity at the portion of the complainant and also for awarding compensation and litigation cost.
Fact of this case
Case of the complainant
This case of the complainant which is deciphered from the petition of complaint filed by the complainant in bird’s eye view is that the complainant is a consumer under the OP No. 1 and the complainant applied for getting new electric connection to the OP No. 1 in respect of schedule mentioned property and as per direction OP No. 1 that the complainant deposited the sum of Rs. 400/- in the office OP No. 1 vide money receipt Nos. 1072201 & 1072292. It is stated that the property mentioned in the A schedule of the complaint petition is a joint and undivided property and in the portion where the complainant is possessing there is no electric connection but in respect of OP Nos. 2 to 4 portion ( as per their possession) there is an electric connection and they are enjoying electricity. It is submitted that many occasions the complainant requested the OP Nos. 2 to 4 to allow him for installation of the electric connection but OP Nos. 2 to 4 were reluctant to allow the complainant for installation of electric connection. It is alleged the schedule mentioned property is a joint and undivided property and there is no preventive order from any Court in respect of suit property in the matter of installation of the electricity but OP Nos. 2 to 4 and their men and agent illegally obstructed complainant’s occupation in B schedule property in respect of which the complainant applied for a new connection to the OP No. 1 by applying all necessary formalities vide application No. 1006078411 and the OP No. 1 approved the said connection and as per their direction the complainant deposited the required fees. It is further stated that one Title Suit being No. 05/2023 is pending before the Ld. Civil Judge ( Sr. Divn.) 2nd Court, Howrah in between the complainant and OP No. 2 to 4 and others for partition which is still pending and no injunction order or any obstructive order has been passed but in spite of that the OP Nos. 2 to 4 informed the OP No. 1 regarding pendency of the said Civil Suit and for that reason the OP No. 1 refused to give electricity to the complainant and issued a letter dtd. 03.09.2021. It is the point of contention of the complainant side that it is obligatory duty of OP No. 1 to render service to their consumer if there is no legal bar or any obstructive order.
It is also pointed out that complainant has been suffering too much for want of electricity and complainant alongwith his family members have been passing their days without electricity and have been suffering a great agony for which the complainant alongwith his family members have been suffering from mental problem and also suffered irreparable loss and injury. For all these reasons the complainant has prayed before this District Commission for installation of the new electric connection in respect of his portion (B schedule property) and also prayed as per prayer of the complaint petition.
Defence Case - The OP No. 1 appeared and contested this case by filing their W/V and stated that they are unable to give electricity to the complainant but had not explained any reason as to why they are unable to install electricity. It is also pointed out that by the OP No. 1 that they rendered full service towards complainant and there is no deficiency of service from their side.
The OP Nos. 2 to 4 also have been contesting this case by filing their W/V and denied each and every allegations which have been described in the complaint petition and the case of the OP Nos. 2 to 4 in a nutshell is that this case is not maintainable in its present form and in the eye of law and also stated that the complainant has not come before this Court in clean hand and so the complainant is not entitled to get any equitable relief u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. It is alleged that the complaint petition is barred by limitation and so it is liable to be dismissed.
It is also pointed out by the OP Nos. 2 to 4 that the complainant is not the owner of the schedule mentioned property and the complainant has no cogent document in support of the ownership and the complainant is trying to take electric connection over the property in respect of which OP Nos. 2 to 4 are the exclusive owner and the complainant has no right, title, interest and possession over the schedule mentioned property. For all these reasons the OP Nos. 2 to 4 also have prayed before this District Commission for dismissing this case with heavy cost.
Points of consideration
On the basis of the pleadings of parties , this District Commission for the purpose of arriving at just and proper decision and also for the interest of proper and complete adjudication of this case is going to adopt the following points of consideration :-
(i) Is this case maintainable in its present form and in the eye of law?
(ii) Is the complainant consumer under the OP No. 1 or not ?
(iii) Has this District Commission jurisdiction to try this case ?
(iv) Whether the complainant has cause of action for institution of this complaint case or not?
(v) Is the complainant entitled to get electric connection at the B schedule property or not ?
(vi) To what other relief / reliefs is the complainant entitled to get from this case?
Evidence on record
The complainant in order to prove his case has filed evidence on affidavit and against the said evidence on affidavit the OPs have filed interrogatories and against the said interrogatories the complainant has given reply.
On the other hand to disprove the case of the complainant the OPs have filed their evidence on affidavit and against the said evidence on affidavit the complainant has filed questionnaire and against the said questionnaire the OP has given reply.
Argument highlighted by both sides
In course of argument the complainant side has filed their Brief Notes on Argument alongwith documents and decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court. In addition to the filing of Brief Notes on Argument the complainant side has also highlighted their verbal submission. On the other hand the OPs have not filed any BNA.
Decision with reason
The issues and / or questions involved in the first 4 (four) points of consideration are interlinked and / or interconnected with one another and for that reason and also for the interest of convenience of discussion, the first four issues are clubbed together and taken up for discussion jointly at first.
Out of these four issues one of the vital points of consideration is jurisdiction of this District Commission / Forum. In this connection this District Commission / Forum after making scrutiny of the material of this case record finds that the complainant is a resident within the district of Howrah and OP No. 1 is carrying on business at Bally within the district of Howrah and OP Nos. 2 to 4 are the residents of Bally within the district of Howrah. These factors are clearly reflecting that this District Commission has territorial jurisdiction to try this case. More so, the claim of the complainant is far below of Rs. 20,00,000/- and so this District Commission / forum has its pecuniary jurisdiction as well. Thus, this point of consideration framed relating to jurisdiction issue is decided in favour of the complainant side. The point of maintainability and the question as to whether the complainant is a consumer under the OP No. 1 or not, is a vital question. For the purpose of determination of this point, this District Commission after making scrutiny of the material of this case record as well as evidence on record finds that the complainant applied for electric connection in his portion at B schedule property to the OP No. 1 and in view of the application the OP No. 1 asked the complainant to deposit the quotation amount and accordingly the complainant has deposited the quotation amount. But fact remains that on account of raising objection by the OP Nos. 2 to 4. The OP No. 1 of this case has not provided electric connection to the complainant. When the complainant has deposited the quotation amount to the OP No. 1 as per direction of the OP No. 1, it is crystal clear that the complainant is a consumer under the OP No. 1 who is service provider. This matter is also highlighting that this case is also maintainable in its present form and in the eye of law. From the material of this case record as well as evidence on record this District Commission / Forum finds that the OP No. 1 has not yet install the electricity at the portion of the complainant ( B schedule property) without having any reason and this factor is clearly reflecting that there is cause of action of the complainant for institution of this complaint case the said cause of action is still continuing.
A cumulative consideration of the above noted discussion goes to show that the first four points of consideration have been proved by the complainant side so the first four points of consideration are decided in favour of the complainant side.
Regarding the point of consideration No. 5 and point of consideration No. 6 the crucial question which is required to be solved is whether, complainant is entitled to get electric connection in his portion at B schedule property from OP No.1 or not ? In this connection this District Commission after making scrutiny of the evidence on record finds that the OP No.1 has failed to provide the electric connection due to pendency of a Civil Suit before the Ld. Civil Court, Howrah. Over this issue it is very important to note that the OP Nos. 2 to 4 have failed to produce any document before this District Commission . In course of trial to show that there is restraining order of the Ld. Civil Court in the matter of installation of the electricity in the B schedule property. No such document has been placed before the OP No. 1 by the Op Nos. 2 to 4. Just for submitting verbal intimation the OP No. 1 cannot restrain himself from providing electric connection to the complainant in his portion at B schedule property. In this regard it is the settle principle of law that every citizens has right to get electricity even he may be a trespassers. In this respect the decision of the Hon’ble High Court passed in Abhimanyu Mazumdar Vs. Superintending Engineer of WBSEDCL which is reported in AIR, 2011, Calcutta Page 64 is very important.. In spite of there is a specific legal provision of the Hon’ble High Court the OP No. 1 has failed to provide electricity / electric connection to the complainant. It clearly indicates that the OP has committed negligence and deficiency of service. In view of such position the OP No. 1 is to be directed to provide electric connection to the complainant at the B schedule property immediately even by taking police help from local police authority. Thus, the above noted two points of consideration are decided in favour of the complainant.
In the result, it is accordingly,
ORDERED
That this Complaint Case being No. 210/2021 be and the same is allowed on contest but in part against OPs.
It is held that the complainant is entitled to get a direction upon the OP No. 1 to provide electric connection at the portion of the complainant at B schedule property within 45 days from the date of this judgment or final order even by taking police help. The OP Nos. 2 to 4 are hereby restrained in the matter of raising any objection / obstacles of providing electricity to the complainant in the B schedule property. Otherwise the complainant is given liberty to execute this award as per law.
No order is passed relating to compensation and litigation cost.
The parties of this case are entitled to get a free copy of this judgment as early as possible.
Let this judgment / final order be uploaded in the official website of this District Commission immediately.
Dictated & corrected by me
President
