DOF.16.3.2009 DOO2./ 8 /2010 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR Present: Sri.K.Gopalan: President Smt.K.P.Preethakumari: Member Smt.M.D.Jessy: Member Dated this, 2nd the August day of 2010 CC.70/2009 G.K.Vijayan, Mochery Edathil Veedu, Kayarala.P.O., 670 602 Complainants (Rep. by Adv.K.P.Subash Chandran) 1.Asst.Executive Engineer, Electric Office, Valapattanam. 2. Asst.Engineer, Mayyil Electric Office, P.O.Mayyil (Rep. by Adv.T.Sarala) Opposite Parties O R D E R Smt.K.P.Preethakumari, Member This is a complaint filed under sectin12 of consumer protection act for an order directing the opposite party to give electric connection to the complainant The case of the complainant is that he belongs to scheduled caste having residential building in 5 cents of land in RS.48/5. He had contacted the Asst. Engineer, Electrical Section, Mayyil for electric connection to the building. But the 2nd opposite party was not ready to accept the application for electric connection, by saying that he will not give connection to the complainant. So the complainant had sent the application to the office of Minister for Electricity and from where it was sent to the 2nd opposite party’s office on 2.2.09 and the complainant had attended the adalath conducted by opposite party on 12.2.09 and the 2nd opposite party is not ready to give electric connection. The reason stated for not giving connection was that the complainant had already taken an industrial service connection for Kairali Welfare society and the complainant is the President of that society and the society has to remit the M.G amount for the industrial service connection given to the society after constructing 550m LT OH line and the cost of converting single phase to three phase. But the society is not functioning now, due to non-availability of loan in time. The complainant is a person who is striving to meet two ends of his life. The complainant has no liability to pay the above said amount to the board and the board can very well initiate actions against the society. So the opposite partiers fail to give connection to the complainant due to the deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. Hence the complaint. In pursuance to the notice issued by the Forum, the opposite parties appeared and filed their version. The opposite parties admit that the complainant had applied for new connection in prescribed form. But the reason for not giving connection is that the complainant had already taken an industrial service connection for Kairali Welfare Society. As President of the society the complainant himself signed the M.G.agreement and power allocation application. The complainant signed in every paper relating to the service connection for Kairali Welfare society. So he is responsible for remitting the M.G amount for industrial service connection given to the society after constructing 550m LT OH line and the cost of converting single phase to three phases. The complainant enjoys the service connection allowed at the cost of KSEB. But he refused to remit the amount to the board. So RR action was initiated against the complainant. An amount of Rs. 1, 21,932/- is due to opposite party as on 27.12.01 in this regard. The complainant field an application before the Adalath conducted at Electrical Division, Valapattanam on 12.2.09 under the Chairmanship of Deputy Chief Engineer, Electrical circle, Kannur and he disposed the mater because as per the version of the Asst. Engineer, Mayyil, the complainant was a defaulter of M.G amount for the industrial service connection taken for Kairali Welfare Society as the President of the society. The opposite parties re not responsible for the financial issues of the society. Even though the complainant has applied to various govt. offices for writing off his arrears, no office had issued any order directing to waive the arrear amount due to the Mayyil Electrical Section, KSEB. The opposite parties are ready to give the service connection to the complainant on clearing the arrears of the Industrial service connection towards the Board. As per prevailing rules existed in the KSEB new service connection cannot be given to the complainant in his name or any building owned to him until the charges of electricity, he has enjoyed in the strength of M.G agreement is cleared. So there is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Upon the above pleadings the following issues have been raised for consideration:- 1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? 3. Relief and cost. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1, DW1 and Exts.A1 to A24 and B1 to B3 marked. Issue Nos. 1 to 3 The case of the complainant is that even though he had applied for electric connection in his building bearing No.MP.II.170/B in RS No.48/05 of Mayyil Panchayth, the opposite parties were not ready to give eclectic connection in building by saying that he has a liability to the board to remit Rs.1,21,932/-. In order to prove the case, the complainant has produced documents Exts.A1 to 24. Such as notice of inauguration, auditor’s report, application dt.14.4.96 to electricity Minster, Acknowledgement card dt.21.11.98, copy of letter to Project Officer, Khadi grama Vyavasaya Office, letter from Kerala Khadi Grama Vyavasaya Board, News paper dt.17.6.98,leter dt.4.3.98 to electricity Minister, Photocopy of the AD, AD card dt.31.3.98, letter dt.17.4.02and 4.10.04, receipt issued from Kannur collect orate, application before the consumer Adalath, receipt from KSEB, Thiruvananthapuram, copy of specimen agreement, copy of community certificate, completion certificate by the owner, completion certificate by Architect, certificate issued from secretary, Mayyil Grama Panchayath, letter issued from Asst. Engineer, Mayyil, Receipt from KSEB dt. 7.5.09, receipt from Sub Engineer, Mayyil, copy of letter issued to Electricity Minister, Acknowledgement. In order to disprove the case opposite arties also produced Exts.B1 and B2 i.e. copy of application for power allocation, Performa for RR action and Minimum guarantee Agreement. The opposite parties admit that the complainant applied for a new connection in prescribed form on 7.5.09. But according to the opposite parties, the complainant had already taken an Industrial Service connection as a President of the society and the complainant himself signed the Agreement and Power allocation and the complainant had signed in every paper relating to the service connection and hence he is responsible for remitting the M.G amount for the Industrial service connection given to the society after constructing 550 m. LT OH line and the cost of converting single phase to three phase and RR was initiated against the complainant . Since he has to pay arrear amount of Rs.1, 21,932/- to the Bird on account of Industrial service connection availed in the name of society which is situated in R.S No.4815 of Mayyil Panchayath. According to opposite parties as per clause 15© of conditions of supply of Electrical Energy states that “Reconnection or new connection shall not be given to any premises where there are arrears on any account due to the Board pending payment, unless arrears including penalty if any are cleared in advance”. As per Ext.B2 the connection was already availed in building NO.MP.VII/55A of Mayyil Panchayth. But the complainant had produced an application for connection. In it the building number shown is M.P.II/170/B of Mayyil Grama Panchayth. But the opposite party has not produced any document to show that both these buildings are one and the same. More over the opposite party deposed before the Forum that “T.K.Vijayan F¶m-fpsS t]cn t]Àk-W-embn _m²-y-bn-Ã.-B-b-Xn-\m IW-£³In-«p-¶-Xn\p AÀl-X-bpv“. But the version of the opposite party is that he is not eligible for connection since both the survey numbers of the building are one and the same. But we all know that there are several buildings in one survey numbers but owned by different persons. One cannot accept the contention of the opposite party by saying that the complainant is not eligible for connection, since both survey numbers are one and the same. The opposite party submits that the only bar to giving connection to the complainant is that the survey numbers are one and the same. But the opposite party has not produced any rules or regulations before the Forum to prove their case. Clause 15 ©of conditions of supply of Electrical Energy is not applicable in this case, since the connection is sought for separate building having No.MPII.170/B. More over Ext.A9 shows that the complainant is belonged to BPL SC A list. Since the complainant is belonging to the lower strate of the society, the opposite parties has to consider the matter sympathetically since there is moral obligation to uplift the lower section of the society. So we are of the opinion that the complainant is eligible for getting service connection to his building having NO.MP.II/170/B of Mayyil Panchayath. The opposite parties were shown deficiency and hence they are liable to pay cost of these proceedings to the complainant. So the opposite parties are bound to give connection to the complainant along with Rs.500/- as cost of these proceedings to the complainant and order passed accordingly. In the result, the complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite parties to give connection to the complainant’s building No.MP.II/170/B along with Rs.500/- (Rupees Five hundred only) as cost of this proceedings to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is entitled to execute the order as per the provisions of Consumer protection Act. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- President Member Member. APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1.Notice of inauguration. A2.Auditors report dt.6.12.99 A3.Copy of application for erecting new transformer A4.Acknowledgement A5.Copy of the letter sent to Project officer, Khadi Grama vyavasaya office A6.Letter dt.27.11.01 sent by Secretary, Khady “ A7.Paper publication A8.Copy of the letter dt.4.3.98 sent to KSEB Minister A9 & 10.Copy of the AD A11.Copy of the application submitted before KSEB A12. Copy of the application submitted before KSEB Adalath A13.Receipt issued by Dist. Collector, Kannur. A14. Copy of the application submitted before KSEB Adalath A15.Receipt A16.Copy of the agreement A17.Copy of community certificate dt.29.2.08 A18.Copy of completion certificate A19.Copy of affidavit A20Letter dt.7.5.09 issued by OP A21.Receipt issued by OP A22.Token issued by OP A23.Copy of the application submitted before KSEB Minister A24.Acknowledgement Exhibits for the opposite party B1.Copy of application for power allocation submitted by complainant B2.Copy of proforma for revenue recovery action B3.Copy of minimum guarantee agreement. Witness examined for the complainant PW1.Complainant Witness examined for the opposite party DW1.Ramachandran /forwarded by order/ Senior Superintendent Consumer Disputes Redrressal Forum, Kannur.
| | [HONORABLE PREETHAKUMARI.K.P] Member[HONORABLE MR. GOPALAN.K] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE JESSY.M.D] Member | | 
