RABI GOBINDA GHOSH Vs. GITA SENGUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant/appellant made out the case that he is an occupier in respect of a shop room at premises No.74, Mahatma Gandhi Raod, Calcutta-9. It is alleged by the complainant/appellant that he was a tenant under erstwhile landlord, Chandrani Seth who sold in the year 1984 the entire premises to Smt. Gita Sengupta, the respondent No.1 in the present appeal who was tenant of the building. It is further alleged that the appellant is a tenant occupier in respect of shop room since last 15 years and he had been enjoying electricity from the meter of Kiran Chandra Chakraborty of Kamal Studio in the same premises at No.74, M. G. Road, Calcutta-9. It is the contention of the complainant/appellant that the disconnection of the supply line from the shop room of the complainant/appellant by the respondent No.1 is a most illegal action on her part, although the said meter had been used by Kiran Chandra Chakraborty and the appellant for last 15 years and there was no default in payment of the electricity charge and in the said circumstances disconnection and removal of the meter standing in the name of Kiran Chandra Chakraborty at the instance of the present Landlady, the respondent No.1 is illegal and high handed, as a result of which the business of the complainant/appellant is being hampered to great extent due to want of electricity and he has been incurring heavy loss regularly as he is not in a position to run his day to day business peacefully and smoothly. In the aforesaid circumstances the complainant/appellant prayed for direction upon the respondent No.2 for installation of new electric connection in his shop room and in the meantime to direct the respondent No.1 to restore electric line to the shop room of the complainant/appellant.

(2.) The main contention of the Opposite Party/respondent No.1 is that the complainant/appellant has filed a civil suit before the City Civil Court at Calcutta for declaration and injunction wherein the petition for injunction filed by the complainant/appellant has been rejected by the Learned Judge 12th Bench of the City Civil Court at Calcutta. It is alleged by the respondent No.1 that the appellant is not a tenant and is a trespasser in the shop room at premises No.74, M. G. Road, Calcutta-9. It is further contended that the dispute of Landlord and Tenant cannot be entertained before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. It is again contended that as the Civil Suit is pending on the selfsame cause of action, the appellant cannot file this complaint proceeding before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum and the subject matter of dispute is purely of civil nature and cannot be entertained before the Forum. So the order passed by the Learned C. D. F. is legal and valid. The respondent No.1 submitted for dismissal of appeal with exemplary cost. DECISION

(3.) Having heard the Learned Counsel of both the parties and perused the materials on record we are convinced that the appellant had been running his shop since last 15 years. So he is admittedly the occupier in respect of shop room at premises No.74 M. G. Road, Calcutta-9. The learned District Forum has travelled all round for nothing and wasted its energy by discussing. So many immaterial and irregular points in the case. The moot question in this case is to be decided if the complainant/appellant is entitled to electricity in his shop room at premises No.74, M. G. Road, Calcutta-9. We are not concerned whether he is a tenant under the Opposite Party/respondent No.1 nor we are going to adjudicate the status enjoyed by the complainant/appellant. We are only concerned to adjudicate if the complainant/appellant is an occupier in the shop room at premises No.74, M. G. Road, Calcutta-9. It is established that he is an occupier in the shop room at premises No.74, M. G. Road, Calcutta-9 and he is entitled to have electric connection in his shop room at premises No.74, M. G. Road, Calcutta-9. As per provisions of Sec.12 (2) of the Indian Electricity Act. The word 'occupier' appearing in the said Sec.12 (2) of Electricity Act clearly indicates that a person who is occupier in the premises is entitled to receive electric connection at his occupied portion.