A prolific writer and journalist, Carl Umegboro has dragged the Abuja Electricity Distribution Company Plc. (AEDC) before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory demanding aggregately for (two hundred and ninety two million, four hundred and sixty five thousand naira only) N292, 465,000:00 for nuisance, trespass to chattel, infringement of fundamental rights, defamation of his character and special damages.
In a writ of summon filed through his counsel, Mr. Sunday Adaji on 29 March with Suit No: HC/FCT/CV/1376/18, the applicant is challenging inter alia the continuous interference of the distribution company to the use and enjoyment of electricity he paid for and entitled to its use and above all, defamation of his character.
In his 39-paragraph affidavit deposed before the court, the plaintiff’s prepaid-metered Abuja residence was disconnected over arrears of adjacent customer on estimation bill in the same premises despite the plaintiff’s advice to AEDC officials to disconnect the defaulting customer directly from the meter-point to prevent disturbing his prepaid-metered apartment. The advice, however, fell on deaf ears as the officials aggressively boasted that nothing would happen if his prepaid metered apartment is disconnected, that at most, it will be reconnected after many days in darkness if at all the petition gets attention.
As AEDC officials recalcitrantly disconnected the electricity and in a tyrannical manner carted away the cables with open verbal abuses, the plaintiff immediately lodged a complaint at AEDC district office but nothing was done. All efforts to get the electricity restored proved abortive. The plaintiff who is also a lawyer thereafter petitioned the company’s managing director at its head office alongside Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) with a demand for immediate reconnection and a fractional compensation of a sum of one hundred and seventy five thousand naira N175, 000 only to mitigate colossal losses suffered due to the unlawful disconnection of his electricity for five days.
Following the later demand, AEDC after reconnecting the electricity suddenly twisted the story in her letter to the plaintiff to escape liability for compensation and falsely accused him of conniving with, aiding and abetting a defaulting customer to indulge in illegal connections and electricity theft as the reasons for the disconnection.
The plaintiff accordingly demanded for substantiation of the allegations or a retraction of the derogatory statement among other reliefs but was unheeded. Thereafter, NERC headquarters queried the DisCo over the act.