Orissa

Cuttak

CC/128/2022

Dillip Kumar Nandi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Executive Engineer,Tata Power Central Odisha Distribution Limited(TPCODL) - Opp.Party(s)

A Bhoi & associates

01 Feb 2023

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                             C.C.No.128/2022

           Dillip Kumar Nandi,

           S/O:LateDaitari Nandi,

           Resident of Village Nahalpur,P.O:Benirampur,

           P.S:Nemalo,Dist:Cuttack.                      ... Complainant.

          Vrs.

 

1.       Executive Engineer,Tata Power Central

Odisha DistributionLimited,(TPCODL),

              2^nd floor,IDCO Tower,Janapath,Bhubaneswar,

               Dist-Khurda

 

1.       S.D.O,(Electrical)Nischintakoili,   At/Po/Ps-Nischintakoili,Dist-Cuttack.

 

2.       Junior Manager/Engineer(Electrical),Asureswar,At/Po-Asureswar,Dist-Cuttack

 

3.       Divisional Office,TPCODL,Salipur,At/Po/Ps:Salipur,Dist-Cuttack          ...Opp. Parties.

 

Present:            Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                             Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    30.06.2022

Date of Order:  01.02.2023

 

For the complainant:            Mr. A.Bhoi,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps.                :          Mr. A.K.Das,Advocate.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President                          

          Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition bereft unnecessary details in short is that he had applied for electricity connection to his Milk Processing Unit and had paid a sum of Rs.6279/- on 26.2.2022 for the said purpose.  The said Milk Processing Unit of the complainant was enabling him to earn his livelihood by means of self-employment which is at Village:Nahalpur on plot no.1102 in Khata No.241.  He had installed the machineries in the said Unit and had submitted his application for power supply of 5 Kw. on 26.2.2022.  The O.Ps by not providing power supply to the said Milk Processing Unit of the complainant had caused irreparable financial loss to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/- to the complainant.  The complainant had made several representations on 21.4.22,5.5.22 and on 20.6.22 in this context to the O.Ps.  It is further alleged by the complainant that he was demanded bribe amount of Rs.2,00,000/- in order to procure the power supply to his unit.  Ultimately, he had to approach this Commission seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/- from the O.Ps towards the mental agony and harassment and loss as caused to him.

          In order to substantiate his case, the complainant has filed copies of several documents together with his complaint petition.

2.       The O.Ps have contested this case and have filed their written version wherein they have admitted that the complainant had applied for obtaining electricity connection to his Milk Processing Unit on 26.2.2022 and had paid a sum of Rs.6279/-.  But it is alleged by the O.Ps that one Harapriya Nandi daughter of Daitari Nandi of Village:Nahalapur who is also the sister of the complainant, was a consumer of the O.Ps bearing Account No.COM-322 since 2012.  The said Harapriya Nandi was the Secretary of the Milk Producers’ Women Diary Cooperative Society Ltd. of village Nahalpur and had continued as such in the said Society till 2016.  Harapriya Nandi had not paid the electricity bills regularly for which there is an outstanding bill of Rs.48,815/- pending to be recovered from her.  The said Cooperative Society where the said Harapriya Nandi was the Secretary was in the same premises where the complainant has applied to get the power supply.  The O.Ps had denied to give the power supply to the complainant when they knew from their verification that the same premises where Harapriya Nandi had taken power supply earlier and had not paid the arrear outstanding energy bills of an amount of Rs.48,815/-which is yet to be recovered, the complainant had also applied for electrical connection to the same premises.  The complainant was advised by the O.Ps to take back the deposited amount of Rs.6279/- which was deposited by the complainant on 26.2.2022 through online.  In order to activate the refund, the complainant had not cooperated and had not given the OTP which was sent to his registered mobile phone bearing no.2653096642. It is thus, the claim of the O.Ps that they were not deficient in their service towards the complainant of this case.  They further allege that the complainant had suppressed the truth knowing fully well that his sister Haripriya Nandi had to repay the outstanding energy bill of Rs.48,815/- to the O.Ps for the same premises where the complainant had sought for to obtain the energy supply.  Accordingly, it is prayed by the O.Ps to dismiss the complaint petition as filed.

          In order to support their stand, the O.Ps have filed copies of several documents alongwith their written version.

3.    Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version of the O.Ps, this Commission thinks it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a proper conclusion here in this case.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps ?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

The complainant has filed his evidence affidavit in this case, which, when perused, it is noticed that the same is only a reiteration of his averments as made in the complaint petition and nothing else.

The O.Ps have also filed evidence affidavit through Mr. Manas Ranjan Mohanty,S.D.O(Electrical) of Nischintakoili and when the evidence affidavit as filed on behalf of the O.Ps is perused, it is noticed that the same is also a reiteration of the contents of the written version of the O.Ps.

Issue No.ii.

Out of the three issues, Issue no.ii being the most pertinent issue is taken up first for consideration here in this case.

From the copies of documents as filed on behalf of the complainant, it is noticed that he had intended to take power supply/electrical connection to his Milk Processing Unit situated at Village; Nahalpur in the plot no.1102 connecting to Khata no.241.  As the available copies of documents annexed to the case record, it reveals that the said landed property is in the name of Daitari Nandi who happens to be the father of the complainant of this case.  As it appears Daitari Nandi the father of the complainant has expired but the complainant has not filed the death certificate of his father Daitari Nandi and also has not filed the legal heir certificate so as to apprise this Commission that he is the owner in succession of the landed property in which he has a Milk Processing Unit where to he intends to obtain the electrical connection from the O.Ps.  That apart, as per the copies of documents filed on behalf of the O.Ps, it is noticed that one Harapriya Nandi daughter of Daitari Nandi of Vill:Nahalpur being the Secretary of Milk Producers’ Women Diary Cooperative Society Ltd.of village:Nahalpur had already taken electrical connection for the same plot and Khata number of the said village and there is an arrear amount of Rs.48,815/- outstanding to be paid by the said Harapriya Nandi to the O.Ps.  When there was already power supply provided by the O.Ps to the same plot in the same Khata of same village and there is an arrear outstanding amount which is to be paid by the person who had obtained electrical line earlier to the said plot and khata, the O.Ps had refused to provide further connection to the same plot for the same khata at Vill:Nahalpur when they noticed about the said arrear outstanding amount on verification after getting the application and processing fee from the complainant of this case.  So when there is outstanding arrear of Rs.48,815/-, the O.Ps by refusing to provide further electrical connection to the same plot and khata of the village:Nahalpur area appears to be justified and this Commission accordingly finds no deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps of this case.   This issue goes in favour of the O.Ps.

Issue no.i& iii.

From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant is not maintainable and the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs as claimed by him.  Hence it is so ordered;

ORDER

Case is dismissed on contest against the O.Psand as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 1^st  day of February,2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission.  

                                                                                                                   Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                             President

         

 

                                                                                                                   Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                  Member