LAWS(NCD)-2017-2-60

GANESH SINGH S/O. LATE RABINDRANATH SINGH, R/AT BIDHAPARK KOLKATA 700124, POLICE STATION AND POST OFFICE BARASAT DISTRICT Vs. GENERAL MANAGER, WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. & ANR. REGISTERED OFFICE AT VIDYUT BHAVAN BIDHANNAGAR, BLOCK DJ, SECTOR II, SALT LAKE CITY KOLKATA

Decided On February 14, 2017
GANESH SINGH S/O. LATE RABINDRANATH SINGH, R/AT BIDHAPARK KOLKATA 700124, POLICE STATION AND POST OFFICE BARASAT DISTRICT Appellant
V/S
GENERAL MANAGER, WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. And ANR. REGISTERED OFFICE AT VIDYUT BHAVAN BIDHANNAGAR, BLOCK DJ, SECTOR II, SALT LAKE CITY KOLKATA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision arises out of the order of the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata (in short, 'the State Commission) dated 20.9.2016 in first appeal No.1146/2015 whereby the State Commission dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner.

(2.) Briefly put facts relevant for the disposal of the revision petition are that the petitioner filed a consumer complaint alleging that he is a bona-fide consumer of electricity connection No.1020664 corresponding to meter No.971838 and service connection No.CJI 424 provided by the opposite party. It was alleged that the connection was commercial and the petitioner never defaulted in payment of bills. Despite that the opposite party disconnected the connection on 7.7.2007 on the allegation of theft of energy for which a criminal case was instituted at police station Barasat as case No.435 dated 7.4.2007 under Sections 135 & 138 of Electricity Act. Subsequently, the petitioner was acquitted in that case on 11th Sept., 2014. It is alleged that despite acquittal of the petitioner, opposite party has failed to restore the electricity connection which amounts to deficiency in service.

(3.) On being served of the notice, the opposite party/respondent contested the consumer complaint by denying the allegations in the written statement. It was pleaded by the opposite party that the electricity connection was disconnected because it was a case of power theft and the petitioner had failed to pay the electricity dues amounting to Rs.11,54,002.00.