WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CALCUTTA
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.C. Datta, President;
Mrs. Silpi Majumder & Mr. D. Karforma, Members
W.B.S.E.B.—Appellant
versus
JYOIRMOY MONDAL—Respondent
Case No. 454/A of 1998—Decided on 24.7.2002
The liability of the consumer cannot be thrust upon a third party, and outstanding dues of another consumer cannot be imposed on a new consumer.
Headnote:
Electricity Supply Dispute - West Bengal State Electricity Board - Indian Electricity Act - Section 24
Fact of the Case:
The West Bengal State Electricity Board appealed against a decision directing it to arrange for the supply of electricity to the complainant's premises. The Board claimed that the complainant had not completed the required formalities for the supply of electricity.
Finding of the Court:
The majority view allowed the appeal, stating that the Forum was not justified in decreeing the claim made by the complainant. The minority view affirmed the Forum's order, directing the Board to arrange for the supply of electricity to the complainant's premises.
Issues: The main issue was whether the complainant had completed the necessary formalities for the supply of electricity and whether the outstanding dues of another consumer could be imposed on the complainant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the complainant had not completed the formalities for the supply of electricity and that the outstanding dues of another consumer could not be imposed on the complainant.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed by the majority view, setting aside the impugned judgment. The minority view affirmed the Forum's order, directing the Board to arrange for the supply of electricity to the complainant's premises.
Mr. Justice S.C. Datta, President—This is an appeal by the West Bengal State Electricity Board against the decision of the Forum directing it to arrange for supply of electricity to the premises of the complainant subject to the observance of all the required formalities for the purpose and as per the rules of the Board.
2. The complainant applied to the O.P. new electric meter as well as new electric connection to his premises. The latter issued quotation and pursuant thereto the complainant deposited Rs. 900/- towards security deposit service connection charge and cost of the meter on 31.1.1998. An agreement was entered into by and between the parties on 8.2.1996. The petitioner claims that he has completed wiring of the premises but the Board did not instal the meter or arrange supply of electricity to the premises. So he approached the Forum.
3. The case was contested by the O.P. by filing a written objection wherein it has been contended that on inspection it was noticed that no wiring was completed though Test Form has been submitted by the complainant. The Board came to learn that there was a service connection in the name of one Smt. Reba Rani Ghosh in Industrial category and there was another connection in her name in commercial category. It has been further stated that huge amount is outstanding and the Board has instituted a case before a Civil Court for recovery of the amount and the said suit is still pending.
4. The Forum disposed of the case with the direction as hereinabefore stated.
5. Aggrieved thereby the Board has appealed. The complainant stated that he has completed wiring of the premises as per the direction of the Board which is however contradicted by the Board. It may be observed that these are the pre-requisites for supply of electricity to the premises and the complainant should observe all the formalities before installation is made by the O.P. The complainant has not disclosed his status in the disputed premises. O.P. has come with a case that there are two connections in the said premises standing in the name of Smt. Reba Rani Ghosh who has two connections; one in industrial category and another in commercial category and a huge amount is outstanding against her. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that until and unless the arrears are cleared, service connection cannot be effected in the premises in question. He submits that they have instituted a civil suit against the said Reba Rani Ghosh for realisation of the amount of arrear bills and the said suit is still pending. In view of the circumstances, as stated above we think that this is a dispute which cannot be resolved by the Consumer Forum. The complainant claims that wiring has been completed which is denied by the Board. The complainant has not disclosed in which capacity he occupied the premises in question. A huge amount is outstanding against one Smt. Reba Rani Ghosh and a civil suit is pending for recovery of the dues. In the circumstances, we think that the Forum was not justified in decreeing the claim made by the complainant. Accordingly we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment.
Minority View :
Mr. D. Karforma, Member—The facts of the appeal have been described in the order passed by the learned President and hence are not being repeated here. However, certain factual aspects need to be highlighted. These are as follows :
1. It is not correct to say that the complainant has not disclosed the capacity in which he occupies the premises in question. Even at the time of application for new connection, the complainant submitted several documents to the WBSEB which included a rent receipt. This is clearly evident from the acknowledgement receipt given by the WBSEB to the complainant on 8.7.1993 which is in the records.
2. Admittedly in the said premises there were two connections in the name of one Smt. Reba Rani Ghosh, who apparently has left leaving behind a large amount of outstanding electricity bills. However, t