D.O.F. 28.07.2011
D.O.O. 14.03.2012
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KANNUR
Present: Sri. K.Gopalan : President
Smt. K.P.Preethakumari : Member
Smt. M.D.Jessy : Member
Dated this the 14th day of March, 2012.
C.C.No.237/2011
Moydu Pathayathil,
Al-Ab Har
P.O. Puthur, : Complainant
Panoor – 670 692
1. Assistant Executive Engineer,
Electrical Sub Division Panoor,
KSEB Kannur – 670692.
2. Assistant Engineer,
Electrical Section, Parad,
KSEB Kannur – 670 693
3. Saleem,
Sub Engineer,
Electrical Section, Parad,
KSEB, Kannur – 670 693
4. Nassir,
Assistant Engineer,
Chakkarakkal Electric Office,
KSEB, Kannur – 670 613
O R D E R
Smt. K.P. Preethakumari, Member
This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection
Act for an order directing the opposite parties to give reconnection under residential tariff and to cancel the bill for ` 633 with ` 5000 as compensation and cost.
The case of the complainant in brief is that he is a consumer of electricity having No.7676 of Parad electrical section, Panoor division. Formerly the building was a shop and later on it is converted to residential building. The complainant used to pay ` 80 as minimum charge promptly eventhough the building was not used for the last four years. The complainant has received a bill dated 06.05.2010 for an amount of ` 861 and has made a complaint before the opposite party, and as a result on 13.05.2010, the lineman has taken away the fuse and later on they disconnected the electricity supply. The complainant has received bills for ` 975 dated 07.07.2010, `1086 dated 04.09.10 and `1213 during 04.11.10 even without electric supply. So the complaint had made a complaint before the KSEB office, Parad. Accordingly the meter was inspected and reported that the meter was functioning even without electricity connection. So the Assistant Engineer again visited the building and examined the same and promised that they will replace the meter and the complainant has to pay minimum charge. The opposite party promised to change the tariff for residential house on production of relevant documents as per the representation made by the complainant that the building is used for residential purpose. Accordingly the complainant has paid necessary fees also. But the complainant has received a negative reply from the opposite party, on the next day when he has approached the opposite party as per the offer made by Assistant Engineer later on the complainant has filed a complaint before the adalat and get an order in favour of him subsequently he has filed a complaint before the KSEB Consumer Grievance, Redressal Forum northern region, Kozhikode and allowed his complaint. But on 16.07.2011, the opposite party issued a notice for `633, but the complainant issued a reply since nothing was mentioned in that notice for change of tariff to residential purpose. The opposite party has a boundain duty to change the tariff and given reconnection to the complainant. But they have not done so eventhough there was an order from the consumer redressal wing of KSEB. So the complainant was suffered so much of mental as well as physical and financial difficulties and all these were caused due to the deficient service of opposite party. Hence this complaint.
In pursuance to the notice issued by the Forum all opposite parties appeared and filed their version admitting that the complainant is a consumer having No.7676, under the Parad Electrical section and Panoor Electrical subdivision. It is also admitted that the building of the complainant is a shop with shutter adjacent to the road and the tariff of the connection is LT VII-B and the connected load is 240W. The opposite party further admits that the consumer was not using the energy for the last several months and the current charges for the six bimonthly bills for the period from 05.03.2009 to 05.03.2010 is 80 and the consumer has remitted bills upto 3/2010. The consumer was served with a bill on 06.05.10 amounting to `861 being bimonthly bill from 05.03.2010 to 05.05.2010 for a recorded consumption of 165 units. The consumer didn’t pay the bill and complained that the meter is faulty and as per the complaint of the consumer, the energy meter was sent to electrical inspectorate, Kozhikode for testing and they filed a report that the meter was found to be error. Meanwhile the complainant has filed a petition before the “Janakeeya Vydyuthi Adalath on 11.02.11 at Kannur for revising the bill and for change of tariff. In the adalat it was decided to revise the bill and to conduct inspection to decide whether request for tariff change can be allowed or not. On inspection on 08.03.11 no evidence of using the room for domestic purpose was available and the neighbours also reported that the shop room is remaining closed for a long time. Accordingly reply was given to Consumer on 17.03.2011 showing the inability to change the tariff from LT VII-B to LTI-A. Revised bill was issued as per the decision in the adalath and what is included in the bill is only minimum charge from 05.03.10 to 06.11.11 and no surcharge or reconnection fee has been charged. It is admitted that the complainant had filed complaint before Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum of KSEB, Northern region, Kozhikode demanding waiver of minimum charge during period of disconnection and change of tariff from KTVIIB to LTIA and the Forum ordered that KSEB is free to collect all the dues from the petitioner and assign suitable tariff as per rules. So 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 in the above case consists of Exts. A1 to A7.
Issues No.1 to 3:
The case of the complainant is that the Consumer No.7676 has to be converted to domestic tariff since the building is used for residential purpose and the opposite parties has issued a bill for ` 633 for the period during disconnection. In order to prove that he has produced documents such as bill dated 05.01.2011, notice dated 16.07.2011, decision taken in Adalat on 11.02.2011, letter dated 17.07.2011, order in OP 10/11-12 of Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Northern Region, Kozhikode meter test report, copy of letter dated 17.03.2011 by opposite party. Admittedly the consumer number 7676 is in the name of the complainant and is a connection of having tariff LT VII-B Ext.A3 is the decision taken in adalat dated 11.02.2011 and as per the decision, it was decided to change tariff to domestic connection only after convincing that the alleged building is used for residential purpose. Similarly Ext.A5 is the order in OP 10/11-12 of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Northern Region, Kozhikode, KSEB. As per the order also, it is seen that the building is shop room. Moreover the complainant admits that it is a shop room. He has not produced any document to show that the building has been used for residential purpose. But the complainant represented before the Forum that he has taken steps to convert the building number from shop to residential building and applied before the Kunnothupramba Grama Panchayath authorities. Moreover the opposite party has produced a letter issued by Executive Engineer, Thalassery Electrical Division stating that they are ready to change the tariff to IA on production of a certificate from the Panchayath showing that the building is used for domestic purpose and also on payment of expense necessary for shifting the meter to the outside. So the opposite parties are liable to change the tariff to domestic on production of the above certificate and necessary fee for shifting the meter.
The complainant contended that the opposite party has issued a bill for ` 633 for the period of reconnection. Ext.A3, A5 and A6 proves that the meter is faulty. Admittedly the meter is faulty. According to the complainant he is regularly paying the minimum charge and the bill amount was increased due to faulty meter and hence was not liable to pay the bill amount since the opposite parties have disconnected the electric supply. The documents substantiate the case of the complainant and hence he is not liable to pay any bill during the time of disconnection, since it was disconnected at the instance of opposite party due to faulty meter. So the bill dated 16.07.2011 for ` 633 is liable to be cancelled. Moreover it is seen that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties by issuing the bill and not redressing the grievance evenafter the repeated demand of the complainant. So they are liable to compensate the complainant by paying `1000 as compensation and `500 as cost of the proceedings. The opposite parties are also liable to change the tariff to domestic purpose. On production of the certificate from Panchayath to the effect that the building is used for domestic purpose and also paying the necessary fees required for changing the meter and along with `1000 as compensation and `500 as cost of the proceedings and order passed accordingly.
In the result the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties
(1) To cancel the bill for `633 dated 16.07.2011.
(2) To change the tariff to domestic purpose and give reconnection on production of certificate from the panchayath to the effect that the building is used for domestic purpose and after remitting the required fee.
(3) To pay `1000 as compensation and `500 as cost of the proceedings within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order and the tariff has to be changed and effect reconnection within two days of production of relevant documents and payment of required charge by the complainant. In default complainant can execute the order as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act.
Sd/- Sd/-
President Member
APPENDIX
Exhibits for the Complainant
A1. Bill dated 05.01.2011.
A2. Notice dated 16.07.2011.
A3. Decisions in Adalath dated 11.02.2011.
A4. Letter dated 17.07.2011 by complainant.
A5. Order in OP. 10/2011-12 of Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum.
A6. Meter Test Report.
A7. Copy of the letter dated 17.03.2011 by opposite party.
Exhibits for the opposite party
Nil
Witness examined for the complainant
Nil
Witness examined for opposite party
Nil
/forwarded by order/
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
