LAWS(NCD)-2004-12-238

LALIT KARMAKAR Vs. MADAN KARMAKAR

Decided On December 31, 2004
LALIT KARMAKAR Appellant
V/S
MADAN KARMAKAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) this appeal has arisen out of the judgment passed by the District Forum, Howrah, on 29.4.2003 in the Case No.139/2002, wherein the Forum below has allowed the case on contest without cost and directed the O. P. Nos.1, 2 and 3 to provide separate electric connection in the premises of the complainant within one month from the date of order.

(2.) The brief facts of the case of the complainant before the Forum below that he applied for installation of separate electric connection in his name at his residence to the W. B. S. E. B. on 24.6.2000. After inspection of the site the W. B. S. E. B. issued a quotation for a sum of Rs.5,236/-. The complainant deposited the entire amount but the W. B. S. E. B. did not instal the separate meter in his name. He made several requests and correspondences with the W. B. S. E. B. but in vain. The W. B. S. E. B. failed to perform its duty in collusion with the other co-sharers (O. P. Nos.4-10 ). There was a common passage for entering into the residential house of the complainant and through that common passage the W. B. S. E. B. could easily draw a line for installation but due to the resistance of the O. P. Nos.4-10 the W. B. S. E. B. could not instal the separate meter in his name through that common passage by erecting the electric pole. According to the complainant the O. P. Nos.4-10 have no right to create disturbance. Thereafter the complainant filed the case before the Forum below praying for direction upon the W. B. S. E. B. for installation of separate meter in his name and also prayed for compensation of Rs.5,000/-.

(3.) Being dissatisfied with the above mentioned order the appellant-Lalit Karmakar has preferred the present appeal before this Commission. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that erection of pole in that common passage will create obstruction for entering the vehicle and that passage is very narrow for erection of a pole. According to the appellant the impugned judgment passed by the Forum below is erroneous, unjust and liable to be set aside.