Date of filing : 28-01-2010 Date of order : 30-07-2010 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD C.C. 20/10 Dated this, the 30th day of July 2010 PRESENT SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER SMT.P.P.SHYMALADEVI : MEMBER M.Krishnan, S/o.V.Krishnan, “Chandralayam”, Thiruvakoli, Bekal.Po, } Complainant Kasaragod.District. (Adv.Babuchandran.K, Kasaragod) 1. The Assistant Engineer, } Opposite parties K.S.E.B, Major Section, Udma, Kasaragod. 2. The Secretary, K.S.E.B, Vaidyuthi Bhavan, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram. (Adv. P.Raghavan, Kasaragod) O R D E R SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT The grievance of the complainant in short is that the Anti Power Theft Squad conducted a surprise inspection of the Home stay run by the complainant and alleging usage of unauthorized additional load of 5KW d issued a bill for 1,01,410/- rupees on 25-3-2009. According to complainant the connection to home stay was given under tariff LT 1(a) but according to opposite party the connection given to the home stay has been changed to tariff LT VII (A). Against the bill the complainant preferred an appeal before the Deputy Chief Engineer, Electrical Circle, Kasaragod. He also remitted 50% of the amount covered as a condition to file the appeal. The Deputy Chief Engineer after hearing dismissed the appeal and directed to pay the entire amount. Accordingly complainant paid the entire amount. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of opposite party in issuing the impugned bill complainant filed this complaint. 2. Opposite party resists the complaint. According to opposite party the complainant is raised against issuance of bill based on the action U/s 126 & 127 of Electricity Act 2003. Hence Sec 145 is attracted in this case and as per Sec. 145 no Civil Court shall have jurisdiction to entertain the matter related to Sec.126 & 127 of Electricity Act 2003. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. 3. The contention of opposite parties that in view of Sec 145 of Electricity Act 2003 the Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint is not sustainable since Consumer Fora constituted under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 is not a Civil Court. Further Sec 173 of the Electricity Act 2003 says that nothing contained in the Electricity Act or any rule or regulation made there under or any instrument having effect by virtue of the Electricity Act rule or regulation shall have effect in so far as it is inconsistent with any other provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. Hence complainant being a consumer of opposite parties has got every right to file the complaint before the Consumer Fora. 4. But the Forum ceases jurisdiction when a consumer files an appeal U/s 127 of the Electricity Act against the assessment made under Sec 126 of the Electricity Act in view of the decision of Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in the case of Jharkhand State Electricity Board & another V. Anwar Ali reported in 2008 CTJ 837(CP) (NCDRC). Unfortunately it is seen that the complainant has already availed this remedy provided under the Electricity Act 2003. So eventhough the complainant has got case on merits we are unable to entertain this complaint. Therefore the complaint is dismissed as not maintainable. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Exts. Forwarded by Order SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT Pj/ | 
