DATE OF FILING:10.9.2009

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 25th day of February, 2010

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

C.C No.174/2009

Between

Complainant : 1. Ayyappan. M,

Valakottil House,

Kottamala P.O.,

Uluppooni,

Idukki District.

(By Adv: Jose Thomas)

And

Opposite Parties : 1. The Assistant Engineer (KSEB),

Sub Division Office, Peerumade,

Pallikkunnu P.O.,

Idukki District.

2. Rajan,

Spot Biller,

Pullikkanam Estate,

Vagamon P.O.,

Idukki District.

3. Ganesh,

Spot Biller (KSEB),

Sub Division Office, Peerumade,

Pallikkunnu P.O.,

Idukki District.

4. Hareesh,

Spot Biller (KSEB),

Sub Division Office, Peerumade,

Pallikkunnu P.O.,

Idukki District.

O R D E R

SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)

The Complainant is having an electric connection for residential purpose from the sub-division office Peerumade. The meter reader never comes to the residence of the complainant for taking the meter readings. So they are issuing bill with Hike meter reading without inspecting the energy meter. The service connection to the complainant's residence is always interrupted. So the complainant is not getting regular electricity supply to his premises. A complaint was given to the Assistant Engineer on 2.7.2009. But nothing was done on that complaint. The voltage in the electric connection of the complainant's residence is very low. So the complainant and his family are using kerosene lamps in the evening. The children of the complainant are not able to study in the evening because of the same. A petition was given to the concerned minister and also a petition was given because of the same. A petition was given to the concerned minister and also a petition was given before the Adalath on 9.11.2006 about the matter. Because of the decrease in the voltage, the complainant's children has suffering a lot. The machineries that are used by the complainant for his job as carpenter are also not working because of the same. So the complainant is entitled for getting compensation in the tune of Rs.48,000/-.

2. The 1^st opposite party filed a written version. As per the written version, the meter reader is visiting the premises once in 2 months. The final reading noted is 3895 and the consumer is being billed for 70 units/per bill for the last 12 months since the meter is seen faulty. As reported by the meter reader the actual connected load in the premises is seen to be more than the registered load of 100 watts which is erroneously noted as 150 watts. Hence the consumption may be more than the average unit billed. During a routine visit the concerned line man had observed that the service wire was not in a good condition and it was immediately replaced. Around 1KM of single phase line around 1KM radius was converted into 3 phase during early 2009 for improving the fag end voltage of Uluppooni transformer where the complainant is being supplied with electricity. Hence there is no voltage shortage. The consumer was given electric supply in the premises as per the records and documents submitted by him at the time of application. The date of connection is 16.10.2004 and the consumer is enjoying electric supply for the last 5 years. He has neither lodged any complaint nor has submitted any grievances regarding the building to which electric supply was given until this time. Recently the complainant has constructed a new house adjacent to the old one. He has drawn electric line unauthorizedly from the old connection to the new house. Whenever a new connection is to be given to a new premise the applicant must submit proper application after undergoing all the formalities. The cunning idea behind this petition is to get a new connection to the new premises without observing the statutory formalities. As agreed by the consumer the electric connection was supplied to the premises bearing consumer No.7943 is for domestic purpose. But from the complainant itself it is seen that the electricity supplied to the premises is used for commercial purposes also. This was against law and hence punishable. So there is no deficiency in the part of the opposite party.

3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?

4.The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Ext. P1 to P6 marked on the side of the complainant and the oral testimony of DW1 and Ext.R1 marked on the side of the opposite parties.
 

5. POINT :- The complainant is having an electric connection to his residence in which he is paying properly the bill issued by the opposite party. But the meter reader never comes to this spot for taking the meter reading. The voltage in this connection is very low. So the children of the complainant cannot study in the evening. The complainant was examined as PW1. The bill issued by the opposite party on 22.2.2009 is marked as Ext. P1 in which it is written that, in the place of the column for the then reading of the power meter: “no way” and in the place where the other details, it is written that “ “. In the bill issued on 25.4.2009, which was marked as Ext. P2, the reading is written as 3895 and the consumption is written as 3730. In the bill issued on 21.8.2009 in which the meter reading is written as 3895, the old reading is written as 3895 and the consumption is written as 70 is marked as Ext. P3. In the bill issued on 28.10.2009 which is marked as Ext.P4, the meter reading is writtenas 3895, the old reading is also written as 3895 and the average consumption is written as 70. In Ext. P5 also the reading is written as 3895 and old reading is also written as 3895 and consumption is written as 70. As per PW1, in the bills issued from the opposite party, the consumption reading is written as 3895 and meter is working promptly. The opposite party is supplying the electrical bills at the tea shop which is near to the residence of the complainant, for the last 7 years. The bulbs fitted in the electric connection are not functioning because of the scarcity of voltage. There is no default in the meter from the beginning itself. The complainant deposed that he availed electric connection 2 years back, as per cross examination for the learned counsel for the opposite party. After that he deposed that he received electric connection 2 years back 2006. The connection was given as per order of this forum earlier. The opposite party was cross examined as DW1. The priority register of the electricity board produced by the opposite party is marked as Ext.R1. DW1 is having official charge of 1^st opposite party and he was the previous meter reader. DW1 deposed that the connection was fitted to the complainant's premises was through the order of this Forum. On perusing Ext. P1 to P5, DW1 deposed that the meter is faulty. But he is not aware whether the spot biller is visiting the premises. There is a transformer in the place named Uluppooni which is not yet commissioned.

So it is evident that the meter reading of the complainant is 3895 for a long period. As per the opposite party the meter is faulty and so the reading is existed as the same. But he is not aware whether the spot biller is inspecting the premises of the complainant. DW1 who was the spot biller and now in the charge of the 1^st opposite party. As per the complainant the meter is always working properly. No affidavit is produced to show that the meter reader has came to the premises of the complainant to take the meter reading. It was written in the Ext.P1 bill that in Malayalam “.. .. … “ and the bills were supplied to the nearest tea shop of the complainant's residence. The opposite party also had informed that the transformer at Uluppooni is not at all commissioned. So considering the deposition of the complainant the voltage in the electric connection of the complainant is low and complainant's children's study is affecting because of the same. As per written version of the opposite party the transformer is functioning at Uluppooni and there is no voltage shortage in that area. Even though the meter is faulty, the opposite party has not replaced the meter for the long time. The same reading seen in the bills issued by the opposite party. So it means that the meter reader never visited the premises of the complainant for a long time which is a gross deficiency in the part of the opposite party. The consumer is paying bills regularly and there is no dues on the same to the opposite party. The opposite party has the obligation to supply enough voltage to the complainant. The complainant deposed that the machineries of the complainant are not working because of the scarcity of voltage. Because it is a residential connection the complainant cannot allege for high voltage for working the machineries. There is no evidence to show that the complainant has got heavy loss because of the non-working of the machineries. The opposite party is bound to supply sufficient voltage connection to the complainant's residence, he is paying the bills promptly.

Hence petition allowed. The opposite party must supply the sufficient voltage in the residence electric connection of the complainant within 2 months of receipt of order on this and Rs.2000/- for cost of this petition failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default.

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 25^th day of February, 2010.

Sd/-

SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
 

Sd/-

SMT. SHEELA JACOB (MEMBER)

Sd/-

SMT. BINDU SOMAN (MEMBER)
 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

PW1 - Ayyappan. M.

On the side of the Opposite party :

DW1 - Rajan. M

Exhibits

On the side of the complainant :

Ext.P1 - Electricity bill issued by the opposite party dated 22.2.2009.

Ext.P2 - Electricity bill issued by the opposite party dated 25.4.2009.

Ext.P3 - Electricity bill issued by the opposite party dated 21.8.2009

Ext.P4 - Electricity bill issued by the opposite party dated 28.10.2009.

Ext.P5 - Electricity bill issued by the opposite party dated 24.12.2009.

Ext.P6 - Copy of the letter written by the complainant to the Minister of the Kerala State Electricity Board.

On the side of the Opposite party :

Ext.R1 - Copy of the Priority Register of the Kerala State Electricity Board, Electrical Division, Kattappana.