State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Abdul Halim vs Cesc Ltd. on 13 December, 2017
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 First Appeal No. A/759/2017 (Arisen out of Order Dated 31/05/2017 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/588/2016 of District Kolkata-III(South)) 1. Abdul Halim S/o Lt. Abdul Rashid, 19, Ekbalpur Lane, P.S. - Ekbalpur, Kolkata - 700 023. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. CESC Ltd. CESC House, Kolkata - 700 001. 2. District Engineer, C.E.S.C. Ltd. South-West Regional office, P-18, Taratala Road, P.S. - Taratala, Kolkata - 700 088. ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. SAMARESH PRASAD CHOWDHURY PRESIDING MEMBER For the Appellant: For the Respondent: Abantika Guha, Advocate Dated : 13 Dec 2017 Final Order / Judgement
Date of filing : 11.07.2017 Date of hearing : - 27.11.2017 The instant appeal Under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for brevity, 'the Act') is at the behest of Complainant Abdul Halim to impeach the final order / judgement dated 31.05.2017 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata, Unit - III(in short, 'Ld. District Forum') in Consumer Complaint No. 588/2016 thereby the complaint lodged by the Appellant U/s 12 of the Act was dismissed on contest without any order as to costs.
The appellant herein being Complainant lodged the complaint before the Ld. District Forum asserting that he is the sole owner of Premises No. 19, Ekbalpore Lane, P.S Ekbalpore, Kolkata - 700023. On 20.11.2012 he has made an application for electric connection at his premises for domestic purpose and to that effect paid necessary charges of Rs 200/-. However, as there was delay in holding inspection, the Complainant went to the office of CESC Ltd where the District Engineer directed him to pay outstanding of Rs 5000/- in the name of one Smt. Sadhana Bose. Ultimately the Complainant was bound to pay the said amount on 13.12.2012. However, subsequently, by a letter dated 31.01.2013 the O.P. No. 1 / CESC Ltd informed him that due to objection raised at site, they are unable to give new connection to the Complainant. The Complainant has made several correspondences with the CESC Ltd but it went in vain. Thereafter, the Complainant lodge a complaint before the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata, Unit - I against the CESC Ltd on the allegation of deficiency on the part of CESC Ltd in providing electric connection at his house but the said case was dismissed for default on 20.06.2016. Challenging the said order, without preferring any appeal, the Complainant has lodged the instant complaint before the Ld. District Forum with prayer for several reliefs, viz - a) to direct the CESC Ltd to give new connection to the Complainant with the police help; b) to pay compensation of Rs 25,000/-, c) litigation costs of Rs 10,000/- etc. The CESC Ltd being O.P. by filing a Written Version disputed and denied the allegation of the Complainant and has stated that they are ready to provide electricity subject to arrangement of free excess or through underground cable in the said premises.
After assessing the pleadings and the evidence led by the parties, the Ld. District Forum by the impugned final order / judgement dismissed the complaint with an observation that when the Complainant previously filed a complaint U/s 12 of the Act before the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata, Unit - I and the same was dismiss for default, the Complainant had no authority to file a fresh complaint in respect of self same cause of action. To assail the said order, the Complainant has come up in this Commission with the present appeal.
I have scrutinised the materials on record and considered the submission advanced by Mr. Suvendu Das, Ld. Advocate for the Respondents. None appears for the Appellant when the record called on for hearing. Under compelling circumstances, I proceeded to dispose of the appeal on merit in absence of the Appellant.
The evidence on record indicates that the Appellant claiming himself to be the owner of premises No. 19, Ekbalpore Lane, P.S - Ekbalpore, Kolkata - 700 023 had applied for electric connection at his premises through the distribution licensee(CESC Ltd) for domestic purpose on 20.11.2012 and to that effect he deposited Rs 200/-. However, as there was no action on the part of distribution licensee, he went to the office of CESC Ltd and on demand paid Rs 5,000/- on 13.12.2012 the outstanding bill in the name of some other person. However, by a letter dated 31.01.2013 the CESC Ltd informed him that due to objection raised at the site, they are unable to give new connection to the Appellant. In this regard several letters and correspondences made by the Appellant turned a deaf ear.
Facing the inconvenient situation, the Appellant lodge a complaint U/s 12 of the Act before the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata, Unit - I being CC/758/2014. The Order No. 15 dated 20.06.2016 of the said case indicates that the Appellant abstained himself from participating in the said proceeding on 15.02.2016, 04.04.2016 and 11.05.2016. Despite a direction of showing cause as to why the complaint shall not be dismissed, the Appellant has shown masterly inactivity to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 20.06.2016 and as such the Ld. District Forum dismissed the complaint for default.
It is surprising to note that the Appellant did not prefer any appeal U/s 15 of the Act challenging the order passed in CC/758/2014 and on the contrary has lodged the instant complaint in the year 2016. Needless to say, the letter dated 31.01.2013 given by CESC Ltd declining to give electric connection was the date of actual cause of action. Had the proceeding being CC/755/2014 was pursued in appeal the Appellant would not have suffered on the ground of limitation. The Ld. District Forum skipped on that point and had it been properly looked into, it would not have admit the complaint. For understanding the situation, it would be worthwhile to reproduce the provisions of Sec 24A of the Act which provides -
" 24A. limitation period. -
(1) The District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub - section (1), a complaint may be entertained after the period specified in sub - section (1), if the complainant satisfies the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission, a the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period.
Provided that no such complaint shall be entertained unless the National Commission, the State Commission or the District Forum, as the case may be, records its reasons for condoning such delay".
The above provision is peremptory and mandatory in nature and does not authorise a Consumer Forum to entertain a complaint filed after two years from the date of accrual of cause of action without accompanied by an application for condonation of delay. It is well settled that letters and correspondences cannot extend the period of limitation. It is quite clear that the cause of action in the instant dispute arose on 31.01.2013 when the Respondent No. 1 by a letter dated 31.01.2013 expressed their inability to provide electric connection in the premises of Complainant. Admittedly, the Appellant being Complainant did not file any application for condonation of delay. Therefore, on that ground alone, the Ld. District Forum should not have admitted the complaint.
However, the Ld. District Forum has rightly dismissed the complaint relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs R. Srinivasan wherein it has been held a second complaint in respect of the same cause of action will not be maintainable.
Considering the above, I do not find any loophole or irregularity in passing the order impugned. Therefore, the appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.
Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. The impugned final order / judgement is hereby affirmed.
The Registrar of the Commission is directed to send a copy of this order to the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata, Unit - III for information. [HON'BLE MR. SAMARESH PRASAD CHOWDHURY] PRESIDING MEMBER