State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sri Somnath Dalapati vs Mr. Babu Das Alias Ashim Das on 5 June, 2017
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 First Appeal No. A/937/2015 (Arisen out of Order Dated 21/08/2015 in Case No. CC403/2014 of District South 24 Parganas) 1. Sri Somnath Dalapati 69/2, Chanditala Branch Road, P.O & P.S - Behala, Kolkata - 700 053. 2. Smt. Kalpana Dalapati. 69/2, Chanditala Branch Road, P.O & P.S - Behala, Kolkata - 700 053. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Babu Das alias Ashim Das S/o, Lt. M.N. Das, Pasupati Bhattacharya Road, P.S - Behala, Kolkata - 700 041. 2. The District Engineer, C.E.S.C. South West Regional Office. P-18, Taratala Road, Kolkata - 700 088. ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. SAMARESH PRASAD CHOWDHURY PRESIDING MEMBER For the Appellant: Mr. Radhamohan Ray, Advocate For the Respondent: Dated : 05 Jun 2017 Final Order / Judgement
Date of Filing - 27.08.2015 Date of Hearing - 15.05.2017 The instant appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is at the behest of the Opposite Party Nos. 2 & 3 to impeach the Judgement/Final Order dated 21.08.2015 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South 24 Parganas at Alipore (for short, Ld. District Forum) in Consumer Complaint no. 403/2014. By the impugned order, the Ld. District Forum directed the Respondent no.2/OP no.1 to provide new electric meter in the shop room of the Respondent no.1/Complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of order.
The Respondent no.1herein being Complainant lodged the complaint asserting that he is a bonafide tenant under OP no.3 in respect of one shop room with varandah at Premises no.69/2, Chanditala Branch Road, P.S.- Behala, Kolkata - 700053 at a rental of Rs.150/- per month. The said rate was enhanced to Rs.300/- per month. The Complainant has been carrying business of repairing of by-cycle and cycle rickshaw. The Complainant used to enjoy electricity through a electric meter stands in the name of opposite party no.3 and as such he approached for installation of a new electric connection at his tenanted premises in his own name.
The Respondent no.2 being OP no.1 by filing a written version has stated that due to strong objection raised by the landlords, they are unable to install electricity but they are ready to provide new electric connection to the Complainant.
The Appellants being OP nos. 2 & 3 by filing a written version have stated that the Complainant is a rank outsider and has no locus standi to install an electric connection and as such the complaint should be dismissed.
After assessing the materials on record, the Ld. District Forum by the impugned judgement and final order allowed the complaint with certain directions as indicated above. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order, the landlords i.e. the OP nos. 2 & 3 have come up in this Commission with the present appeal.
I have considered the submission advanced by Appellant no.1 in person. None appears for either Respondent no.1 or Respondent no.2. I have also scrutinised the materials on record.
The Appellant no.1 has submitted that they have already instituted a suit for eviction against the Respondent no.1 being Ejectment Suit in the Court of Ld. 5th Civil Judge (Jr. Division) at Alipore and obtained an ex parte decree. However, the Appellants did not mention the number of Ejectment Suit instituted by them against the Respondent no.1. The Appellants also did not take any pain to produce the certified copy of judgement or decree of the Ejectment Suit filed by them. Therefore, when inspite of having opportunity, the Appellants have withdrawn the best evidence, an adverse inference must be drawn against them.
In any case, the Respondent no.2 i.e. the Distribution Licensee is ready to provide electricity to the Respondent no.1. The Ld. District Forum has rightly observed that electricity is an essential service and in modern civilization without electricity the day to day life is next to impossible. The anxiety of the Ld. District Forum has sound basis because Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is the main provision casting an obligation upon every distribution licensee to give supply of electricity to the premises when the application by the owner or occupier of such premises is made and Sub Section (1) of Section 43 of the said Act enjoins upon the distribution licensee to give such supply of electricity to the owner or occupier of the premises, as the case may be, within one month after receipt of the application requiring such supply.
Therefore, the only point has to be looked into whether the Complainant is an occupant of the premises or not. The Ld. District Forum has come to a finding that the Complainant is a tenant in respect of the premises of the Appellants. It means and indicates that the Respondent No.1 is occupant of the premises as a statutory tenant. Therefore, in view of the provisions of Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, as an occupier of the property or a part thereof, the complainant has a statutory right to call upon the distribution company (herein CESC Ltd.) to give him/her electricity, and once the requisite application was filed, the distribution company incurred a statutory obligation to give him electricity. A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court reported in 2000 WBLR (Cal) 533 (Manju Mukul Guha - vs. - Pradip Kumar Mullick & Ors.) has observed that even an injunction order of the Civil Court directing the petitioner not to change the nature and character of the property cannot get in the way of his getting electricity from the distribution company. The landlord has no right to raise objection. It is a statutory right which cannot be curtailed by whim or fancy of any person including the landlords.
For the reasons aforesaid, the appeal being devoid of merit is dismissed.
The impugned judgement/final order is hereby affirmed.
The Registrar of this Commission is directed to send a copy of this order to the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South 24 Parganas at Alipore (now at Baruipur) for information. [HON'BLE MR. SAMARESH PRASAD CHOWDHURY] PRESIDING MEMBER