State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Subrata Kumar Das vs M/S. Cesc Ltd. on 20 April, 2015
Daily Order STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 First Appeal No. FA/317/2014 (Arisen out of Order Dated 13/01/2014 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/331/2013 of District Kolkata-II) 1. Subrata Kumar Das Floor No.Grd, 5/1A, Madhu Gupta Lane, Kolkata -700 012. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. M/s. CESC Ltd. CESC House, Kolkata-1, P.S. Hare Street. 2. District Engineer, M/s CESC Ltd. Central District, 15/1, Chowringhee Square, Kol-69. 3. Jhunu Babu 5/1A, Madhu Gupta Lane, Kolkata -12, P.S. Muchipara. 4. Purusattam 5/1A, Madhu Gupta Lane, Kolkata -12, P.S. Muchipara. ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. DEBASIS BHATTACHARYA PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. JAGANNATH BAG MEMBER For the Appellant: Mr. Debesh Halder, Advocate For the Respondent: DipanwitaChowdhury., Advocate ORDER Dt. 20.04.2015 JAGANNATH BAG, MEMBER
The present appeal is directed against the order dated 13.01.2014 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata, Unit II, in CC No. 331 of 2013, whereby the complaint was dismissed ex parte on the ground of no negligence on the part of the OPs.
The complaint case , in brief , was as follows:
The Complainant, being a tenant under Sri Kumaresh Mukherjee, applied for electricity connection in his shop-room and deposited Rs. 200/- as necessary fee on 05.09.2013. The OP /CESC Ltd, informed that an inspection will be held on 12.09.2013. At the time of inspection, OP Nos. 3 to 5 raised objection to the installation of electricity meter, as a result of which, the CESC Ltd. could not take any action for inspection of the meter place. Though OP Nos. 3 to 5 have no right to raise any objection and though as per Section 163 of the Electricity Act 2003, the CESC Ltd. has power to take action against the said OPs / other tenants,, the OP / CESC Ltd., did not take any action and the electricity connection was not provided, which act of the said OP was a deficiency in service. Hence, a petition of complaint was filed before the Ld. Forum below with prayer for direction upon the said CESC Ltd to give a new meter in the name of the Complainant with necessary police help and to pay compensation and other relief.
The case was heard by the Ld. Forum below exparte. Upon hearing of the Ld. Lawyer of the Complainant and upon perusal of materials on record the Ld. Forum below observed that the Complainant failed to produce any receipt other than the single copy of rent control challan for the month of July 2013 towards payment of Rs. 56/- in respect of one shop-room at premises No. 5/1A, Madhu Gupta Lane , Kolkata -700 012 . No document showing that the Complainant was inducted as a tenant and there was an agreement between the landlord and the Complainant could be produced either. Particulars of the shop-room were not given. It was also observed that OP / CESC Ltd. were unable to carry out inspection of the premises as the meter board room was not accessible.
Ld. Forum below dismissed the complaint with the direction to enquire about no objection of the landlord / owner of the shoproom and to proceed as per law, if any certificate about no objection and existence of any agreement about tenancy of the shop-room between the Complainant and the landlord could be produced.
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order of the Ld. Forum below, the Complainant - turned-Appellant has come up with the prayer for direction to set aside the impugned order and to pass necessary orders .
Ld. Advocate appearing for the Appellant submitted that Ld. Forum below failed to appreciate that though Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 / CESC Ltd. are bound to give electric connection under Section 43 of the Electricity Act 2003, they neglected in their duty and unnecessarily raised the point of no objection from the landlord. It was the duty of the service provider, CESC Ltd. to take police help for effecting the installation of new meter in the name of the Complainant/ Appellant. But instead of taking any such action , the said OPs are sitting idle which is deficiency in service on their part. Ld. Forum's order is devoid of reasons and goes against the provisions of the Electricity Act. Ld. Advocate referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in W. P. No. 18976 (W) of 2014, emphasizing that the CESC Ltd. may seek police assistance for effecting installation of electric connection to the petitioner's shop-room. Ld. Advocate, therefore, pleaded for setting aside the impugned order with direction upon CESC Ltd. to provide new electric meter as applied for apart from payment of compensation and costs.
Ld. Advocate appearing for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submitted that though the CESC Ltd . deputed their men on 12.05.2013 for inspection of the meter board room and though the applicant / Complainant was informed in advance of such inspection, the meter board was not accessible. The applicant was requested by a letter dated 13.09.2013 to arrange for access , but no step was taken. As a result, the matter was not proceeded. Further, the Complainant never submitted any no-objection letter from the landlord about new service connection in the shop room which is claimed by the Appellant to be occupied as a tenant. The appeal does not have any merit and deserves to be dismissed.
Decision with Reasons We have gone through the memorandum of appeal, together with annexures thereto, being copies of the impugned order, the petition of complaint, the rent control challan for Rs. 56/- in respect of one shop-room at premises No. 5/1A, Madhu Gupta Lane , Kolkata - 700 012 for the month of July 2013 and letters dated 05.09.2013 and 13.09.2013 written by OP/Respondent No.2 to the Complainant / Appellant.
There is no dispute that the Appellant had applied for installation of a new electric meter in respect of his room as claimed to have been occupied as tenant under one Sri Kumaresh Mukherje and deposit of Rs. 200/- was made and the service provider CESC Ltd./Respondents sent advance intimation about inspection of the premises where the new service connection was to be provided.
It is found that the Complainant / Appellant was duly intimated about inspection of the meter board room for extending new electric connection to his shop-room. But, there is nothing on record to show that the Complainant/Appellant was present at the time of inspection by the men of CESC Ltd. Further, Ld. Forum's observation about non-furnishing of the details of the shop room and non-production of no-objection certificate from the landlord carries much weight in deciding the complaint. It is quite convincing, as observed by the Ld. Forum below, that a copy of a single rent control challan, does not establish the fact of tenancy of the room in question and / or occupancy thereof. Non-joinder of necessary party , i.e., the landlord / owner is also a pointer in the matter which raises serious doubt about the actual purpose of filing the complaint against the service provider and we are not inclined to hold that the Complainant/Appellant was actually occupying the shop-room for which he wanted new electric connection. In that view of the matter , Ld. Forum's order dismissing the complaint is found to be not worth interfering with, except for the fact that Ld. Forum's direction upon the service provider CESC Ltd. to carry out an enquiry about tenancy of the shop room is considered to be beyond the scope of adjudication. Accordingly, such part of the impugned order shall stand expunged. Hence, Ordered that the appeal be and the same is dismissed on contest against Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and exparte against other Respondents. The impugned order is confirmed with expunction of the second part of the order. There shall be no order as to costs. [HON'BLE MR. DEBASIS BHATTACHARYA] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. JAGANNATH BAG] MEMBER