O R D E R Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President. Case of the petitioner, filed on 6..5..2009 is as follows: Petitioner is a permanent resident of House No. 332, Ward 20 of Kottayam Municipality. According to the petitioner he resides there for the last 60 years along with his father and other family members. Petitioner states that she is the possessor of the house and three cents of property attached it. Petitioner on 23..3..2009 given an application for electric connection, in the BPL category, to the opposite party. Opposite party availed electric connection with vide consumer No. 22085. Along with the application petitioner submitted necessary documents in support. On 5..5..2009 a notice was served to the petitioner by the opposite party stating that one Adv. Santhosh, Kandanchira filed -2- a complaint to the opposite party stating that he is the owner of the building and three cents of property. In the notice opposite party stated that they disconnect of the electric supply within 24 hours. According to the petitioner act of the opposite party, in issuing notice Dtd: 5..5..2009, is a clear deficiency in service. So, she prays for an order declaring the notice Dtd: 4..5..2009 as void. Petitioner also prays for a direction to the opposite party no to disconnect the electric connection to the petitioners premises. She also claims cost and compensation. Opposite party entered appearance and filed version contenting that the petition is not maintainable. Opposite party admitted that they had given electric connection to the petitioner on 23..3..2009. According to the opposite party in the application for connection. Petitioner misrepresented the opposite party by stating that she is owner of the building and property attached there to. On 26..3..2009 complaint was filed Adv. Santhosh Thomas, Kandanchira said complaint is stated he is the owner of the building. Further, more, he had submitted an order in MC-39/05 RDO, Kottayam order demolishing of the building. So, in the basis of the complaint as per law opposite party issued a notice for disconnection of the electric supply. According to the opposite party act of legally and there is no deficiency in service on their part and they pray for dismissal of the petition with their costs. Points for determinations are: i) Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? -3- ii) Relief and costs? Evidence in this case consists of affidavit filed by both parties and Ext. A1 to A8 documents on the side of the petitioner and Ext. B1 to B7 documents on the side of the opposite parties. Point No. 1 Opposite party produced application for connection submitted by the petitioner to the opposite party Dtd: 16..3..2009. Said document is marked as Ext. A1. In Ext. A1 petitioner is shown as the owner of the house with vide No. 322 ward No. 20, Kottayam Municipality. Opposite party produce the complaint given by Adv. Santhosh Thomas, Kandanchira to the Exe. Engineer, KSEB, Pallom sid document is marked as Ext. B4. In Ext. B4 Santhosh Thomas, Kandanchira claimed ownership of the building No. 722/11 Kottayam Municipality. Copy of the notice issued by the opposite party to the petitioner is marked as Ext. B7. In Ext. B7 opposite party stated that the petitioner availed the service connection after misrepresenting the employees of the board that the applicant is the owner. Petitioner has not produced any document to prove the ownership of the petitioner. Even now from the available evidence produced by the petitioner. We presume that petitioners is in possession of house No. 332/20 (old No. 722 XI – XX) In our view the act of the opposite party in issuing notice demanding disconnection is legal because as per regulation 21 (7) e of the KSEB terms and conditions of supply 2005. If the service connection has been obtained after mis representing the employees of the board that the applicant is the owner of the premises to which the supply is given then the board has right to disconnect the electric connection after given 24 hours notice. As per regulation 4 of the Kerala Electricity supply code 2004 an owner or occupier can apply for supply of energy. Regulation 14 (4) of the KSEB terms and conditions of supply 2005 states that if the intending consumer is not, owner of the premises, to be electrified, he shall furnish the consent agreement in form No. 4 annexed from the owner of the premises and if he is unable to produce the consent agreement from the owner of the building service connection can be effected the applicant executes and indemnity bond in form No. 5. Consumer For a concerned is not the authority to decide the ownership of the building. We are only concern in consumer disputes. In our view there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. However, taking a lenient view. We are also not inclined to put an ignorant consumer in darkness. So, point No. 1 is found accordingly. Point No. 2 In view of the finding in point No. 1 petition is allowed in part. Petitioner is given one month time to approach the opposite party to get the connection as per regulation 14 (4) of the KSEB terms and conditions of supply 2005. If petitioner satisfies legal formalities. Opposite is of the discretion to give supply as per the application submitted by the petitioner. In the result petition is disposed accordingly. Dictated by me transcribed by the Confidential Assistant corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 14th day of May, 2010. Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/- Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member Sd/- -5- APPENDIX Documents for the Petitioner: Ext. A1: Letter No. DB9/09-10 – 4.S- 2009 Dt: Nil. Ext. A2: Copy of the photo identity card. Ext. A3: Copy of ration card Ext. A4: Copy of certificate issued by the Municipal Chairperson , Kottayam Dtd: 6..3..2002 Ext. A5: Copy of O.S No. 753/92 Ext. A6: Copy of O.S 752 Ext. A7: Copy of judgment OS 752/97 Ext. A8: Certified copy of deed No. 1566/2008 Documents for the Opposite party Ext. B1: Copy of application for service connection Dtd: 16..3.2009 Ext. B2: Certificate issued by the Chairperson by 6..3..2009 Ext. B3: Copy of complaint Dtd: 26..3..2009 given by Adv. Santhosh Thomas Kandanchira Ext. B4: Copy of complaint Dtd: 20..4..2009 by Santhosh Thomas to Exe. Engineer, KSEB Ext. B5: Copy of the order No. M/c 39/05.Dtd: 23..12..2005 Ext. B6: Copy of receipt Dtd: 25..3..2009 Ext. B7: Copy of the notice issued by the opposite party to the petitioner Dtd: Nil. By Order, Senior Superintendent.
| | HONORABLE Bindhu M Thomas, Member | HONORABLE Santhosh Kesava Nath P, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE K.N Radhakrishnan, Member | | 
