Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 275 (CAL)

DOLLY SAHA v. CESC LTD

2000-06-06

BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA

body2000
B. BHATTACHARYA, J. ( 1 ) THESE two writ applications were heard analogously as common questions of law and fact are involved herein. ( 2 ) ONE Dolly Saha is the petitioner in W. P. No. 3730 (W) of 2000 while Sm. Laxmi Rani Saha, her mother-in-law is the petitioner in the other writ application viz. W. P. No. 4934 (W) of 2000. ( 3 ) THE grievance of Dolly against CESC is that although no amount is due and payable for the consumption of electricity through the 440 volt meter standing in her name, the CESC authority is demanding additional amount alleged to be due for the consumption of electricity through the meter which stood in the name of Basanta Saha, since deceased, her father-in-law although the said meter was disconnected in the year 1990 and thereafter she obtained a new meter in her own name. ( 4 ) LAXMI Rani Saha, the petitioner of the other writ application has come forward with the allegation of illegal disconnection of her 220 volt domestic connection for non-payment of 1/10th of the amount due and payable for the consumption of electricity through the aforesaid 440 volt meter which stood in the name of the deceased husband. ( 5 ) MR. Sanyal, the learned counsel appearing for the CESC authority has strenuously contended that on November 26, 1990, his client disconnected the 440 volt connection which stood in the name of Basanta Saha for non-payment of Rs. 1,32,012/ -. Thereafter Dolly by practicing fraud got a new 440 volt connection in the same premises. In such application Dolly was described as a tenant of the said premises. Such fraud having been detected, the CESC authority has every right to disconnect the electricity of Dolly unless the said amount is paid off. Mr. Sanyal further contends that Laxmi Rani being the widow of Basanta, the deceased consumer, is liable to 1/10th of the amount in accordance with her share in the properties left by Basanta and as such his client rightly dis-connected the supply of 220 volt connection in the name of Laxmi Rani in the said house. Mr. Sanyal further contends that Laxmi Rani being the widow of Basanta, the deceased consumer, is liable to 1/10th of the amount in accordance with her share in the properties left by Basanta and as such his client rightly dis-connected the supply of 220 volt connection in the name of Laxmi Rani in the said house. ( 6 ) THEREFORE, the question that arises for determination in these writ applications in whether any amount due and payable for the consumption through the 440 volt meter in the name of Basanta can be realised by CESC after ten years from Dolly and Laxmi Rani on the threat of disconnection of their independent supply. ( 7 ) BEFORE I proceed to answer the aforesaid question, I keep on record the admitted fact that Basanta died on November 13, 1975 leaving Laxmi Rani as widow and nine children including the husband of Dolly and a Civil Suit for partition initiated by Laxmi Rani against her children is pending where the premises in question are the subject matter. ( 8 ) MR. Kundu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Dolly has placed before this Court a certificated copy of the judgment dated September 7, 1991 passed by the State Consumer Redressal Commission in SC Case No. 607 of 1991 preferred by CESC against his client wherefrom it appears that the CESC authority on acceptance of Rs. 12,393,43 paise from Dolly towards the amount payable for the consumption through the meter of Basanta Saha agreed to give a new connection of 440 volt connection to her. Mr. Sanyal could not dispute the veracity of the aforesaid fact. In my view, after accepting such amount, the new meter having been given to Dolly, the CESC authority cannot allege any fraud upon Dolly and thus cannot force her to pay any amount other than the charge of consumption through the meter standing in her name on the threat of disconnection. ( 9 ) THEREFORE, so far W. P. No. 3730 (w) of 2000 is concerned, the CESC authority is restrained from realising any further amount from Dolly for the alleged due for the consumption through the meter which stood in the name of her deceased father-in-law and from disconnecting her 440 volt connection for realisation of any amount payable for consumption of electricity through the meter which stood in the name of her father-in-law. ( 10 ) THIS application is thus allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs. 12. So for the other writ application being W. P. No. 4934 (W) of 2000 is concerned, in my view, the CESC authority acted illegally in disconnecting the 220 volt connection of Laxmi Rani for realisation of proportionate 1/10 th of the amount payable for the consumption through the meter that stood in the name of her husband. In this case, Basanta died in 1975 and the alleged non-payment is for a period subsequent to his death. After the death of the recorded consumer an heir cannot be held liable for any post-mortem consumption through that meter unless it is proved by CESC that the said particular heir actually consumed the electricity or agreed to take responsibility of such consumption and before disconnecting separate meter of such an heir it is for the CESC to prove such fact and get a decree to that effect from a Civil Court; otherwise, before getting such a decree, at the most, the CESC can suo moto enforce its right to realise the dues for consumption through such meter to the extent of the amount of security deposit of the deceased consumer by encashing the same. The position however would have been different if the dues were for consumption during the life time of Basanta. In such a situation it would become a debt of Basanta and the heirs would have been liable to the extent each inherits subject to further condition that they would not be joint debtors thus disabling CESC from realising the entire dues from one or some of them. 13. The 220 volt connection in the name of Laxmi Rani is in existence for about 50 years i. e. before the death of her husband and as such unless there is any default of payment in respect of the said 220 volt connection standing in her name, the CESC authority could not disconnect her line when admittedly there is no allegation of any improper use of electricity by her. Under the aforesaid circumstances, I direct the CESC authority to restore electric connection of Laxmi Rani in respect of Consumer No. 08097090007 within 48 hours. Under the aforesaid circumstances, I direct the CESC authority to restore electric connection of Laxmi Rani in respect of Consumer No. 08097090007 within 48 hours. The CESC authority is directed to raise a fresh bill from December, 1999 till disconnection on the basis of actual consumption through that meter without adding any further sum alleged to be payable for consumption through the meter of Basanta Saha. The petitioner should be given at least 15 days time for payment of such dues. The CESC will not realise any late payment surcharge if the same is paid within 15 days as mentioned above. This writ application is thus allowed with costs which I assess at 200 Gms. Both the writ applications are thus disposed of. Later on 6. 6. 2000 mr. Subir Sanyal appearing for the CESC prays for stay of operation of this order. In view of finding above, I find no reason to stay my order. Such prayer is rejected. If Xerox certified copy of the order is applied for by the parties, the office will supply the same by day after tomorrow. Application allowed.