Skip to main content

Brief notes of argument in consumer cases of electricity


Before the Hon’ble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata Unit – III ( Kolkata South ), at Alipore Judges’ Court, Alipore, Kolkata – 700 027.

 

                                                          CC / 477 / 2017

 

                                                          In the matter of :

                                                          Sri Shyam Sundar Dhal,

                                                                             ________Complainants

-      Versus –

Sharda Devi Bubna and Others,

               ________Opposite Parties

 

BRIEF NOTES OF ARGUMENT

ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT

 

Facts :

 

That the Complainant has no electricity connection, as such he is facing much difficulties to run his livelihood business, therefore he requested the opposite parties nos. 1, and 2, who assured verbally to provide the no objection regarding electricity connection at the occupied premises, being rented portion and thus the complainant applied for the new electricity connection, on placing application to the District Engineer, South West District, C.E.S.C., P-18, Taratala Road, Kolkata – 700 088, but surprisingly the opposite party no. 3, deny to install electricity connection at the occupied tenanted portion of the complainant.

14-01-2017 – the opposite party no.3, assured that they would provide the electricity connection with meter within a month but they failed and neglect to do so.

The Complainant is not a defaulter to pay rent in any occasion since the year 1977, and at present the Complainant is paying rent through the rent controller, Kolkata.

The Complainant hold the right, title, over the schedule property and consequently the Rent Controller, Kolkata, acknowledge the same and treated the Complainant as tenant accepting the rent through the rent controller challan for the premises being no. 7/1, Burdawan Road, Kolkata – 700 027.

Water and Electricity are the primafacie need for the livelihood of the human being, therefore the opposite party no.3, acted illegally and performed in inhuman nature.

The Complainant is a tenant without any default, therefore the Complainant has every right to get electricity connection in his rented portion at the premises.

Electricity, in modern day is essential. It is integral part of one’s life. Right to life has been recognized in our Constitution. But it is not merely one of living, but the quality of life. Further, it is not out of place to mention that Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, envisages that every distribution licensee shall on an application by the owner or occupier of any premises provide supply to such premises within a month.

The Electricity Act’ 2003 :

Section 43. (Duty to supply on request): --- (1) 1[Save as otherwise provided in this Act, every distribution] licensee, shall, on an application by the owner or occupier of any premises, give supply of electricity to such premises, within one month after receipt of the application requiring such supply:

 

Provided that where such supply requires extension of distribution mains, or commissioning of new sub-stations, the distribution licensee shall supply the electricity to such premises immediately after such extension or commissioning or within such period as may be specified by the Appropriate Commission:

 

1 Subs. by Act 26 of 2007, Sec.8 for the words “Every distribution” [w.e.f. 15th June 2007].

 

Provided further that in case of a village or hamlet or area wherein no

provision for supply of electricity exists, the Appropriate Commission may extend the said period as it may consider necessary for electrification of such village or hamlet or area.

 

1[Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-section, “application” means the application complete in all respects in the appropriate form, as required by the distribution licensee, along with documents showing payment of necessary charges and other compliances.]

 

(2) It shall be the duty of every distribution licensee to provide, if required, electric plant or electric line for giving electric supply to the premises specified in sub-section (1) :

 

Provided that no person shall be entitled to demand, or to continue to

receive, from a licensee a supply of electricity for any premises having a separate supply unless he has agreed with the licensee to pay to him such price as determined by the Appropriate Commission.

 

(3) If a distribution licensee fails to supply the electricity within the period specified in sub-section (1), he shall be liable to a penalty which may extend to one thousand rupees for each day of default.

 

Section 44. (Exceptions from duty to supply electricity):

 

Nothing contained in section 43 shall be taken as requiring a distribution licensee to give supply of electricity to any premises if he is prevented from so doing by cyclone, floods, storms or other occurrences beyond his control.

 

If the law of Land provides that a person in possession of any premises may not be dispossessed there from except in accordance with law, it is implicit that the possession of the person is protected till such time that an appropriate forum holds otherwise and the person is removed from the premises under the due process of law. It would then defy reason to suggest that such person can continue to be in possession but be denied an essential utility as electricity which is within the broad sweep of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

 

 

Judicial References relied on :

 

 

1.   2007 (1) CHN 31, MANU/WB/0331/2006 – P.Madhava Rao – Versus – Superintending Engineer and Others.

 

2.   AIR 2009 Cal 187, MANU/WB/0017/2009 – “Fashion” Proprietor Aswani Kumar Maity – Versus – West Bengal Electricity Distribution Co. Limited and Others.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

OBJECTIONS OF RESPONDENTS TO DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION FILED BY PETITIONER

  OBJECTIONS OF 2ND TO 4TH RESPONDENTS TO DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION FILED BY PETITIONER:- 1. The interim application is not maintainable since the affidavit accompanied the application does not speaks truth and its vague and not specific in disclosing accurate reasons for the absence of petitioner/plaintiff in the days wherein court has scheduled to plaintiff evidence. 2. The affidavit consist of mere allegations un-supported by documents, hence liable to be dismissed. The written statement and objections filed by these respondents to the main petition be read as part and parcel of this objections to delay condonation application. 3. The matter of condonation of delay, it is an established position that every day's delay has to be explained and a person who seeks the exercise of the discretion to condone the delay in his favour cannot run away by making a mere general statement or mere allegation unsupported by document or mere passing of his laches upon his advocate. 4...
Post a Comment
Read more

"As Is" and "As Available"

  " As Is" and "As Available " " As available " applies to goods and services, including those provided online. ... With apps and websites, " As Available " indicates contractual standards only when the product or service is available. “As Is” alerts a buyer in a sales contract that they accept the purchased item, be it real estate, animals, automobiles or appliances, in its present condition. It also assumes the buyer has a right to inspect the property first so they can assess any defects and make an informed decision. “As available” applies to goods and services, including those provided online. At its most simple definition, it refers to products in stock or real estate that remain on the market. Once purchased, there are no guarantees because the product is no longer available. It also refers to store or office hours with a bricks-and-mortar business. With apps and websites, “As Available” indicates contractual standards only when the produc...
Post a Comment
Read more

Quashing a False 498a FIR

  Quashing a False 498a FIR Quashing of FIR is a tough matter ! Courts generally are reluctant to interfere at the stage of investigation and only very strong grounds + persuasive arguments can make a bench sit up and taking a 482 matter seriously. FIR’s can be quashed if they an abuse of process of law/prima facie don’t disclose any offence or are inherently improbable - If you are thinking about quashing of FIR u/s 498a/406. These are the grounds/list of judgments of quashing that would help bolster your plea : GROUNDS FOR QUASHING IN A 498a/406/34 IPC MATTER • BECAUSE  Section 482 of the Cr.PC  categorically saves the inherent power of High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In the instant case it is pertinent in the ends of justice and to prevent an abuse of the process of law that the impugned FIR be quashed. • BECAUSE ...
Post a Comment
Read more