IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM:: SIVASAGAR.
Present: 1. Sri Ajit Barthakur,
President, D.C.D.R.F.,
Sivasagar District,
2. Dr. M. Huda,
Member, D.C.D.R.F.,
Sivasagar District,
3. Mrs. P. Gohain,
Member, D.C.D.R.F.,
Sivasagar District,
C.P. Case No. 01 of 2004.
Shri Pradip Kr. Das,
S/O Moniram Das,
Bhuyanhat Adarsha Gaon, Amguri,
District. Jorhat, Assam, ……… Complainant.
Vs.
1. The Chief Executive Officer,
Sivasagar Electrical Circle,
A.S.E.B., Sivasagar, Assam.
2. The Superintending Engineer,
Sivasagar Electrical Circle,
A.s.e.b., Sivasagar, Assam
3. The Executive Engineer
Nazira Electrical Division,
A.S.E.B., Nazira.
4. The Asstt. Executive Engineer
Amguri Electrical Sub-Division,
A.S.E.B., Amguri, ……… Opp. Party
A P P E A R A N C E:
For the Complainant : P.C. Kalita.
For the Opposite Party : P.C. Bezbarua.
Date of evidence : 16.12.2004, 28.04.2005, & 17.08.2006.
Date of argument : 10.12.2009.
Date of Judgment : 17-12-2009.
J U D G M E N T A N D O R D E R
This is a proceeding under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
This complaint’s case, precisely, is that he is a registered consumer of the opp party, under Amguri Electric Sub-Division, A.S.E.B. Amguri, bearing the consumer No. BH/74 and the service connection was taken in the year 1993 from Saud Gaon, L.T. Line and he had been regularly paying the bills of energy consumption. In spite of being so, on 04.02.2003, the service connection of the complainant/petitioner was disconnected by the authority without any prior notice. The complainant then lodged a petition with the Opp. Party No. 4, the Asst. Executive Engineer, Amguri Electrical Sub-Division, A.S.E.B. to restore the service connection to his residence. The Opp. Party No. 4, then by a letter, dated 13.02.2003 informed the complainant that, in fact, the service connection was not disconnected, but shift5ed on 05.02.2003 from the L.T. Line of Saud gaon to Bhuyanhat Adarsha gaon, under Teok Electrical Sub-Division, Jorhat. Thereafter, the complainant, by his letter, dated 31.03.03, requested the Chief Engineer, A.S.E.B, Assam, Guwahati for restoring the service connection and accordingly directed the S.E. (P&P) to make necessary arrangements. The C.E.O., Jorhat Electrical Circle referred the same to the C.E.O., Sivasagar, Electrical Circle, A.S.E.B. Sivasagar, vide letter, dated 04.04.03, for taking necessary action and accordingly, the complainant once again requested the Opp. Party No. 4, the Asstt. Executive Engineer, Amguri Electrical Sub-Division, A.S.E.B., Amguri in writing, dated 24.09.2003 for restoration of service connection, but no steps was taken by Opp. Party. No.4. Hence, the instant complaint petition, praying for restoration of electric service connection of the complainant/petitioner and to grant adequate compensation for loss and injury of the petitioner etc.
The Opp. Parties contested the complainant’s case by filing a joint written objection, on the grounds, inter-alia, that there is no cause of action, because there is no deficiency in service as there was no service at all; that the complaint petition is bad in law as the complainant has no legal character to seek redress on illegal grounds; that the complainant is not a resident within the territorial jurisdiction of Jorhat Electrical Circle and Electrical Sub-Division having jurisdiction of Jorhat district; that erroneously, for a short period, electrical connection, under Amguri Electrical Sub-Divisional was given to the complainant, and when the illegal and unauthorized connection came to notice of the A.S.E.B. authority, as per procedure, it simply shifted the connection of the complainant to its proper Sub-Division and that the service connection of the complainant was not disconnected. Hence, prayed to dismiss the case.
In view of the above pleadings of the complainant and the Opp. Party – A.S.E.B., the following points are taken into consideration, in order to reach at a just decision in the case :-
1. Whether this District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has jurisdiction to redress the grievances of the complainant?
2. Whether the disconnected electrical power connection to the complainant’s residence has not been resorted, despite request ? AND
3. To what relief(s), if any, the complainant is entitled ?
To prove the respective cases/pleas the complainant and the Opp. Party – A.S.E.B., have laid the evidence of one witness, each, under order 18, Rule 4 of the C.P.C. and cross examined them vice-versa, at length.
We have gone through the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, proffered by both the sides and heard argument of the learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the Opp. Party – A.S.E.B. The learned counsel for the complainant could be heard due to absence of the complainant, on 8 (eight) consecutive dates, including today, and as such, decided to deliver judgement in the case, which has been pending since 02.01.2006, where the evidence was last recorded on 17.08.2006, and finally closed on 04.06.2009.
FINDINGS :
POINT NO. 1 JURISDICTION :
Under section 11(2) (a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, provides that a complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, the Opp. Party or each of the Opp. Party, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides or carry on business, or personally works for gain.
According to the complainant, the causes of action, in the instant case arose on and from 04.02.2003, when the power service line was disconnected by the A.S.E.B., Amguri Electrical Sub-Division – Opp. Party 4 and each date of his approach to the Opp. Party for restoration of the disconnected power line to his residence at Amguri Bhyanhat, within the jurisdiction of this forum. The Opp. Party have contested the said contentions of the complainant by pleading that the complainant has failed to make out any defenciency of the service on their part. It has been further pleaded that the complainant, being a resident of one district, under different Electrical Sub-Division of A.S.E.B., he cannot claim connection of electrical power line of the A.S.E.B. in different Electrical Sub-Division of different District.
The evidence-in-chief of the complainant shows that after approval and sanction of the Executive Engineer, Nazira Electrical Division – Opp. Party No. 3, power service connection was given to his residence, situated at Amguri Bhuyanhat gaon, under Jorhat district from Saud gaon L.T. Line, under Electrical Sub-Division – Opp. Party No. 4. In cross-examination, he has, inter-alia, deposed that his residence is situated, crossing the river Jhanji, at Bhuyanhat Adarsha gaon, situated within Teok Electrical Sub-Division, within the district Jorhat. Teok Electrical Sub-Division wanted to provide power connection to his residence, but as the said power Line’s voltage usually remains low, he raised objection to it and desired maintenance of the power supply from the Opp. Party No. 4 – Amguri Electrical Sub-Division, situated within the district of Sivasagar.
D.W. 1 Shri Amia kumar Neog, the Sub-Divisional Officer (E) of Amguri Electrical Sub-Division has, inter-alia, deposed that the complainant is a resident of Teok Electrical Sub-Division and it is separated from Amguri Electrical Sub-Division by Jhanji River. It has been further deposed that the previous power connection, given to the complainant from Amguri Sub-Division was not legal.
On scrutiny of the above evidence from both sides, it is apparent that this Sivasagar District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the complainant’s grievances on two grounds, firstly- the complainant’s residence is situated at Bhuyanhat Adarsha gaon, to which the Electrical Power Line, sought to be restored, falls, admittedly, within the jurisdiction of Jorhat district, and secondly – Amguri Electrical Sub-Division A.S.E.B. – Opp. Party No. 4, from which the electrical power supply has been sought, falls within the jurisdiction of the Sivasagar district. Hence territorially, the complainant’s grievances cannot, legally be adjudicate by this Sivasagar District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, which relates to Jorhat Electrical Division and Teok Electrical Sub-Division, who are the parties in the instant case, admittedly situated within Jorhat district. Jurisdiction of other District Forum, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises, cannot be ousted by reasoning of existence of any form of agreement to the contrary. It is also seen that the complainant has declined to accept the power connection, offered by Teok Electrical Sub-Division, Jorhat, on the ground of its alleged unsatisfactory service, compare to the service rendered by Amguri Electrical Sub-Division, Sivasagar, which cannot be sound ground to agitate the grievance before this District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, which has no jurisdiction over the subject matter.
In the premises, it is held that Sivasagar District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the grievance of the complainant of this case. Accordingly, this point is decided in the negative.
POINT NO. 2 : WHEATHER DISCONNECTION RESORTED :
In view of the reasons and findings on the foregoing point No 1. to the effect that District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the grievances of the complainant, it is further held that this point No. 2 cannot be decided, on merit, by this Forum.
POINT NO. 3 : QUANTAM OF RELIEF(S):
In view of the reasons and findings on the foregoing Points No. 1 & 2, this Forum is of the opinion that neither the complainant nor the Opp. Party are entitled to any relief (s), as prayed for, being the subject-matter is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum and for not impleading either Jorhat Electrical Division or Teok Electrical Sub-Division as one of the Opp. Parties in this case, in absence of whom the grievances of the complainant cannot be decided, on merit.
O R D E R :
In the result, it is directed that the complaint/petition shall be returned to the complainant/ petitioner for presentation before the competent District Consumer Redressal Forum.
No cost is awarded.
This judgment and order, as above, is delivered on this, the 17th day of December, 2009.
Typed to my dictation and
corrected by me, bearing
my signatures on each page
Sd/-
1. Dr. M. Huda
Member, D.C.D.R.F.,
Sivasagar District,
Sd/-
2. Mrs. P. Gohain Sd/-
Member, D.C.D.R.F., (AJIT BARTHAKUR)
Sivasagar District, PRESIDENT
*****************