ARUN SHAW Vs. CESC LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court: The husband and wife are the petitioners in this and have jointly prayed for two separate new electric connections in the premises No. 33, Rabindra Sarani, Liluah, Howrah. There is no dispute that applications of the petitioners have been received by the CESC and at certain stage it had agreed to give connection in usual course. However, dispute has arisen as CESC demanded for payment of the alleged outstanding dues of Rs. 14,723/- in respect of electric energy consumed in past by the third parties at the same premises.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioners is that the petitioners are not liable to pay the same as they were not consuming electric energy nor they are consumers for the above outstanding dues. Therefore, under any circumstances they are not obliged to pay any amount in this respect for obtaining new separate connection.

(3.) In affidavit-in-opposition, the case of the CESC in substance, is that the petitioners were the beneficiaries in respect of the supply line previously given to one M/s. Shyam Steel Corporation which was surrendered subsequently. The said Shyam Steel Corporation was a tenant in respect of the said premises, therefore, the petitioners are obliged to pay the aforesaid amount in order to get separate supply connection. Another technical point has been taken that the petitioner No. 2 Rina Shaw is not the lawful occupant, so she cannot obtain separate connection.