Back
TRIPURA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Mr. Justice U.B. Saha, President, Mrs. Sobhana Datta and Mr. Narayan Ch. Sharma, Members
SENIOR MANAGER, BANAMALIPUR ELECTRICAL SUB-DIVISION, TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD. - Appellant
Versus
SMT. RENU BALA GHOSH - Respondent
Case No. A34 of 2017
Decided on : 22-08-2017
Miss Rajashree Purakayastha, Advocate, for the Appellants; Mr. Bhaskar Debroy, Advocate, for the Respondent
Illegal disconnection of electricity supply without prior notice constitutes deficiency of service and entitles the consumer to claim damages and compensation.
Headnote:
Consumer Protection Act - Electricity Disconnection - Section 56 of the Electricity Act, 2003, Section 24 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 - The court discussed the provisions of section 56 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and section 24 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, highlighting the mandatory 7 days' notice requirement for disconnection and the entitlement of the consumer to claim damages and compensation for illegal disconnection.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant alleged that the electricity supply to her house was disconnected without prior notice during a family function, leading to harassment and mental agony. The opposite parties claimed non-payment of dues and issuance of prior notice.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the disconnection without prior notice was illegal and amounted to deficiency of service, entitling the consumer to claim damages and compensation. The court also upheld the compensation awarded by the District Forum.
Issues: Disconnection without prior notice, non-payment of dues, legality of disconnection, compensation for harassment and mental agony.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the disconnection without prior notice violated the mandatory provisions of the Electricity Act and the Indian Electricity Act, leading to illegal disconnection and entitlement to compensation.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the impugned judgment and awarding compensation to the complainant.
JUDGMENT
U.B. Saha, President (Oral) - The instant appeal is filed by the appellants, namely, Senior Manager, Banamalipur Electrical Sub-Division and the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd. under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the judgment dated 28.04.2017 passed by the Ld. District Consumers Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as District Forum), West Tripura, Agartala in Case No. C.C. 04 of 2017 whereby and where under the Ld. District Forum directed the appellants (hereinafter referred to as opposite parties/TSECL) to pay compensation amounting to Rs. 10,000/- and also Rs. 2,000/- as cost of litigation i.e. in total Rs. 12,000/- to the complainant, the respondent herein. Payment is to be made within two months of the judgment, if not paid, it will carry interest @9% per annum. The appellants have also filed an application for condoning the delay of 26 days in preferring the appeal and a stay application.
2. Today is fixed for hearing of the appeal.
The delay was condoned and the appeal was admitted.
Heard Miss Rajashree Purakayastha, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties as well as Mr. Bhaskar Debroy, Ld. Counsel appearing for the respondent (hereinafter referred to as complainant).
Brief facts of the case are as follows :-
The complainant, Smt. Renu Bala Ghosh being a consumer of the opposite parties filed an application under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act before the Ld. District Forum alleging that on 30.12.2015 when a family programme was going on in her house, the staff of the opposite parties, Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd. disconnected the electric supply in her house as per order of the Senior Manager, Banamalipur, opposite party No. 1 without any prior notice. It is also stated that before disconnection of the electricity supply, she requested the staff of the opposite parties not to disconnect the connection as the due date of making payment of bill is 31.12.2015 and she also assured that on the following day i.e. within due date, she would pay the bill, but they did not pay any heed to her request and abused with objectionable words in presence of her guests. She also tried to communicate to the opposite party No. 1 over telephone, but the opposite party No. 1 will-fully ignored. Finding no other alternatives and considering the family prestige, she paid the bill amounting to Rs. 2,404.00 including the disconnection and reconnection charge and thereafter, the connection was given at 04.30 p.m. Therefore, she prayed for compensation for such harassment and mental agony.
3. Opposite party No. 1 & 2 appeared and filed their written statement denying the claim of the complainant. In their written statement, it is stated that as per ledger, complainant had outstanding bill dues w.e.f. 17.08.2015 to 14.09.2015, which was due on 28.09.2015, 15.09.2015 to 12.10.2015, which was due on 27.10.2015 and 13.10.2015 to 15.11.2015, which was due on 30.11.2015. But the complainant did not pay the same in due time. So the opposite parties had given notice to the complainant as per provisions of Electricity Act, but when there was no fruitful result, the electric supply in the house of the complainant was disconnected. There is no deficiency of service.
4. Complainant in support of her case produced copy of Electric Bill, Money Receipt of TSECL and also produced her statement on affidavit. Thereafter, she had also produced the statement on affidavit of Sri Chinmoy Saha and Sri Sushen Karmakar.
5. Opposite parties on the other hand, produced receipt copy of the bill, receipt of connection and disconnection charge, copy of ledger book. They also produced the statement on affidavit of one Goutam Chakraborty, Senior Manager, Banamalipur Electrical Sub-Division, the opposite party No. 1.
6. Considering the evidence on record, the Ld. District Forum passed the impugned judgment. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, t
