CESC Limited vs NUNKI DEVI

THIS appeal has arisen out of the judgment passed by the District Forum, Kolkata Unit-1 on 8.1.2002 in the case No. 578/2001, wherein the Forum below has allowed the case on contest without cost and directed the O.P. to instal new AC electric meter in the premises of the complainant without asking for any outstanding dues within three days from the date of service of the copy of the order. The complainant was directed to pay the necessary charges.

THE facts of the case in a nutshell are stated hereunder : Being a tenant the complainant applied for supply of electricity to the O.P. in his tenanted portion by providing separate AC electric meter in her name. THE O.P. refused to provide electricity to the complainant on the ground that there were some outstanding dues of previous consumer. THE complainant was told that until and unless the outstanding dues are paid the electric connection could not be given. THEreafter, the complainant filed a case before the Forum praying for direction upon the O.P. to give separate electric connection in her name without charging the outstanding dues of the previous consumer. Being dissatisfied with the above order the CESC-appellant has preferred the present appeal before this Commission. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the respondent failed to produce any document regarding his status in that premises. It is further submitted by the appellant that as per the I.E. Act the appellant has right to refuse installation of a fresh connection in the same premises until the outstanding dues are liquidated. The appellant''s further view is that the respondent also enjoyed energy regularly from the said meter till the disconnection and after disconnection the respondent applied for installation of new AC separate meter in her name. So according to the appellant the present respondent was liable to settle the outstanding dues before installation. According to the appellant the judgment passed by the Forum is not proper, is erroneous and liable to be set aside.

Perusing the record we find that the respondent being a tenant applied for a new separate AC meter in her name to the appellant-CESC. After receiving her application the appellant directed him to pay the outstanding dues of erstwhile consumer of that premises. As the respondent did not deposit the dues, the appellant-CESC did not instal the meter in her name. In this respect we are unable to appreciate such attempt of the appellant to realise the dues of some other person from the respondent. We think that there cannot be any rule to shift one''s liability upon the shoulder of another in such a manner and if anybody defaults in making payment of his/her dues, CESC can take recourse to law for realisation of its dues. For that, CESC cannot approach a third person for making payment for the defaulter unless there is any proof of any nexus between the two.

IN this regard Hon''ble High Court, Calcutta has specifically held in various cases, such as M/s. Balasaria Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. CESC Ltd. and Others, reported in 1996 (1) CHN 15, that under the law a citizen cannot be saddled with the liability of another consumer. We have also considered the observation of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in this context in the case of M/s. Isha Marbles v. Bihar State Electricity Board and Another, reported in I (1995) BC 529 (SC)=JT 1995 (2) SC 626, wherein the Supreme Court categorically held that in terms of Section 24 of the INdian Electricity Act, the liability of the consumer cannot be thrust upon a third party. In view of the aforesaid settled legal position, the authorities of CESC cannot demand any amount from the respondent (herein) towards the arrears dues of another consumer. In this regard we are of the opinion that CESC supplies electricity under specific agreement and separate contracts. For realisation of any dues falling under contract the remedy lies before the Civil Court and CESC cannot claim the same from any other prospective consumer/potential user. The refusal of the appellant (CESC) to a prospective consumer/potential user on the ground of unrealised dues of some other consumer is improper and unjust. Moreover, the appellant has failed to produce any evidence that the present respondent consumed electricity from the said meter and there was a nexus between the respondent and the earlier defaulter. The respondent has prayed for installation of the new meter at his tenanted portion. But in this context we are of the opinion that according to the Indian Electricity Act second service connection is not permissible in the same premises. As there is one service connection in the name of the landlord, another service connection cannot be given. Only separate meter can be given in her name.

HENCE, the appellant is directed to take necessary steps for providing connection and supply of electrical energy to the respondent in his name at the premises by installing a separate AC meter without claiming any payment towards the outstanding dues of the erstwhile consumer, subject to compliance of all necessary formalities by the respondent in respect of getting new electric connection as per the IE Act. After completion of the required formalities excepting the payment of outstanding dues of third party by the respondent, CESC shall instal new meter and provide separate electrical connection to the respondent as early as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of completion of all such formalities. Be it mentioned that the appellant-CESC shall insal the meter at the common place where other meters are installed. The respondent shall produce document regarding his lawful tenancy in that premises before installation of the meter in her name. The respondent shall arrange free access to the meter board for the CESC people at the time of installation. Thus the appeal is dismissed ex parte. The impugned judgment of the Forum is also affirmed. With the above observation the appeal is disposed of. A copy of this order is to be sent to the respondent immediately. Appeal dismissed.