By Smt. Saji Mathew, Member:

The gist of the complaint is as follows:- The Complainant is the consumer of consumer NO.11439 of the 1^st Opposite Party. The connection was provided by Opposite Party on recommendation of 3^rd Opposite Party and was used for irrigation of his agricultural land. The electricity bills were paid by the 3^rd Opposite Party. Later on the Complainant could not continue cultivation and requested the 1^st Opposite Party to disconnect the supply. The matter was also informed to the 3^rd Opposite Party also. Till 22.01.2004, the Complainant used 193 units of

electricity and thereafter stopped using electricity. Even then, the 1^st Opposite Party continued to issue bills and the Complainant made complaint to the 1^st Opposite Party. The Complaint was considered on the Adalath held on 10.2.2009 and the Complainant was directed to pay Rs.13,403/-. Even after the Adalath, 1^st Opposite Party issued a bill dated 04.10.2010 and failed to disconnect the supply. The Complainant is not liable to pay any bills issued by the 1^st opposite party. There is deficiency in service on the side of the 1^st Opposite Party and 2^nd Opposite Party. Therefore the Complainant prays for an order directing the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties not to collect any amount as per any bills issued by them and not to issue any further bills. He also prays for a compensation of Rs.50,000/-.

2. The 1^st Opposite Party has filed version and stated that the Complainant availed a connection under LT V tariff vide consumer No.11439. The connection was given under minimum guarantee scheme and a minimum guarantee agreement was executed by the Complainant . The minimum guarantee amount was the estimate cost including 10% establishment cost of Rs.28,171/- and the amount guaranteed per annum was Rs.7,043/- for Seven years. Thereafter the complainant submitted documents for getting subsidy for the minimum guarantee amount and accordingly the supplementary schedule for the same was accepted on 07.05.2000 and the minimum guaranteed amount per annum was reduced to Rs.1,542/- for Seven years. The water motor installed in the said consumer number was having a capacity of 1.5 HP. The Opposite Parties have drawn 260 metres of electricity line for the purpose of providing the above connection.

3. The Complainant had not remitted any amount towards the minimum guarantee amount. Then the Opposite Parties issued an arrear bill during 2009 for an amount of Rs.20,471/-. As per the request of the Complainant the matter was considered in the revenue adalath conducted by the Opposite Parties and the amount was reduced to Rs.13,403/-. The Complainant did not pay this amount and the Opposite Parties dismantled the connection on 25.09.2010. Thereafter on 04.10.2010 the Complainant was served with the final arrear notice for paying the minimum guaranteed amount of Rs.20,972/-.

4. The Complainant had not given any petition for disconnecting the service. The consumers who have executed minimum guarantee agreement are liable to pay the minimum guaranteed amount even if the connection is disconnected. Hence the Opposite Parties pray for the dismissal of the case.

5. The Complainant is examined as PW1, Exts.A1 to A4 were marked on the side of the Complainant. The 1^st Opposite Party was examined as OPW1, documents were marked

as Exts.B1 and B2 on the side of the Opposite Parties. Documents produced by 1^st Opposite Party on the order in I.A 62/2011 were marked as Ext. X series.

6. The matters to be decided are as follows:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for any relief?

7. Point No.1:- Ext.A2 is the notice given to the Complainant based on the decision taken in the Adalath held by the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties. Ext.A2 shows the current charge as 10973 and surcharge as 9498. The surcharge is reduced by the Adalath to Rs.2,430/- and the Complainant is asked to pay Rs.13,403/-. This amount is not paid by the Complainant. Then on Ext.A3, the current charge arrear is shown as 20939 plus surcharge. On Ext.A1 also, Rs.20,939/- is demanded as arrear. Any of these documents do not show any amount to be paid as minimum guarantee amount. But Ext.A5 shows the total amount of Rs.20,471/- as minimum guarantee amount. Ext.A5 is dated as 27.02.2009. Ext.X1 is the statement showing the arrear details of consumer under free electricity to agriculture scheme up to 9/07. This document does not show any arrear in the name of the Complainant.

8. Ext.B1 is the minimum guarantee estimate which shows the minimum guarantee amount as Rs.7,043/- per annum for seven years. On the same document itself minimum guarantee amount is shown reduced to Rs.1,542.75 per annum for seven years. On perusal of all these documents, it seems that there is lack of clarity about the alleged arrear regarding the

consumer No.11439. The Opposite Party is demanding the amount as per the minimum guarantee agreement. This agreement signed by the Complainant is not produced before this Forum. In these circumstances, the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties are found not entitled to collect any amount in respect of consumer No.11439. Hence point No.1 is found against the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties.

9. Point No.2:- The Complainant is entitled to get all the bills quashed regarding consumer No.11439.

Hence the complaint is partly allowed and the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties are directed not to collect any amount regarding consumer No.11439. No order as to cost or compensation.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 27^th July 2011.

Date of filing:20.10.2010.