Tribunals and Commissions

ANIRUDDHA CHATTERJEE vs C.E.S.C. Ltd.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 17 August 2000 · Citation: 2001 1 CPJ 44

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.C.Datta , S.Majumder , D.Karformas J.
RESULT
Appeal disposed of
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

1 paragraphs · 179 words
1.

THIS is complainant''s appeal against the order of dismissal passed by the Forum on 9.3.1998. The complainant is a tenant under one Kalpana Mondal and he has enjoyed electricity through a meter standing in the name of said Kalpana Mondal. The complainant wants a separate meter in his own name. The complaint was dismissed by the Forum on the ground that both the civil and criminal cases were pending before the appropriate Forum. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the said cases are not pending. He asserts that the appellant is in present occupation of the premises in question and as such he is entitled to get separate connection in his own name. Having considered the submission we think that the complainant may be directed to approach the CESC for fresh connection in his name and on such application being filed and usual formalities being observed, the CESC will process the same and give separate connection to the premises of the complainant in accordance with law. With this observation, the appeal is disposed of. Appeal disposed of.