By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:
The complaint filed against the Opposite Party to withdraw the electricity bill issued to the Complainant and for cost and compensation.
2. The complaint in brief is as follows:- The Complainant is a consumer of electricity connection and conducting a fancy shop for his livelihood. The monthly bills issued to the Complainant demanded normally Rs.300/- to Rs.392/- the maximum. The meter installed in the premises was defective and the Complainant remitted fees and gave an application to rectify the defect of the meter. Mean while the Complainant was issued a demanded bill for the payment of Rs.9,862/- for the period from 12.08.2010 to 11.10.2010. The demand cum disconnection notice given to the Complainant for Rs.9,862/- in the mistake of the electricity meter is unauthorised and the Complainant is not entitled to remit the same. The bill issued to the Complainant is to be cancelled. On request of the Complainant the Opposite Party made a surprise inspection in the site and a check meter was also installed. The amount demanded for energy that was not consumed by the Complainant is unreasonable. The Opposite Party after demanding the exorbitant sum when found not remitted disconnected supply of energy.
3. There may be an order directing the Opposite Party to withdraw the electricity bill dated 11.10.2010 issued to the Complainant and also to be given Rs.10,000/- towards cost and compensation.
4. The Opposite Parties filed version in short it is as follows:- The Complainant in this case is not an actual consumer the supply to the consumer No.13769 is LT VII B tariff. The fancy shop name 'Aliya' is run by one Koya not buy this consumer. The Complainant was issued a bill of Rs.19,762/- towards consumption of energy. On application of the Complainant the meter installed in the premises were replaced on 16.12.2009 application of the Complainant the inspection was carried out in the premises and no defect in the electrically apparatus was noted. The amount of the bill demanded from the Complainant was for the consumption of energy and it was mainly because of earth leakage resulted by the defective wiring. The defect was cured by the Sub Engineer though it is not meant to do by the official. The check meter installed also showed the reading of the meter other correct. The electronic meter installed is still in working condition and there is no dispute from the Complainant regarding the subsequent bills. The relief prayed by the Complainant are unsustainable and it is to be dismissed with cost to the Opposite Party.
5. Points in consideration are:-
Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?
Relief and cost.
6. Points No.1 and 2:- The evidence in this case consists of the proof affidavit of the Complainant, Opposite Parties, Exts.A1 to A7, B1 and B2. The oral testimony of the Complainant and Opposite Parties are also considered.
7. The dispute in issue in the instant case is in respect of the bill amount Rs.9,862/- demanded from the Complainant. Subsequent earlier bills issued to the Complainant shows that the Complainant was demanded Rs.392/- as the maximum bill amount in the earlier bills. Opposite Party also contented that there was a sudden apprise in the consumption of energy consequent to earth leakage. The Complainant remitted necessary fees for the inspection and rectification of the defects. The Complainant filed petition for rectification of the leakage of energy. It is admitted by the Opposite Party that the leakage of energy was in the area of meter. On installation of the check meter it is also found that the meter already existing was not defective. The energy leakage took place due to the burning of insulation wire as admitted by the witness. The reason for the burning of wire may admittedly due to excess flow of energy. The Complainant timely informed the Opposite Party for the rectification of defect. The responsibility for the leakage of the energy cannot be absolutely cast upon the Complainant. Any how the Complainant remitted 1/3 of the bill amount that is Rs.3,287/- towards disputed bill. In the oral testimony of the witness it is also admitted that any defect in the wiring in the region of meter and outgoing terminal, similarly the defect in between the meter and outgoing terminal the board has to rectify it. Any how the Opposite Party rectified the burned wire and checked the leakage of energy on application of the Complainant. The document produced by the Opposite Party does not show that in which area the burning of wire is effected that lead to the leakage of energy. The leakage of energy lead to the disputed bill. The amount remitted by the Complainant Rs.3,287/- towards the disputed bill as directed by this Forum is to be considered as the payment made by the Complainant towards the bill amount and the rest of the bill amount is cancelled.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. Rs.3,287/- (Rupees Three thousand Two hundred and Eighty Seven only) remitted by the Complainant towards the bill No.30594 dated 11.10.2010 is to be considered as the payment towards the disputed bill and the rest of the amount in the bill is cancelled. There is no order as to cost and compensation.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 26th May 2011.
Date of filing:06.11.2010
PRESIDENT: Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
/True Copy/ Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
A P P E N D I X
Witness for the Complainant:
PW1. Ashraf Complainant.
Witnesses for the Opposite Parties:
OPW1. Dipindas A.E, KSEB, Meenanagadi
OPW2. Remesan P Sub Engineer, KSEB.
Exhibits for the Complainant:
A1. Bill and Receipt
A2 series (2 Nos) Bill. dt:12.08.2010.
A3. Receipt. dt:12.10.2010.
A4 series Copy of Lawyer Notice, Acknowledgment and Postal Receipt.
A5 series (2 Nos). Receipts.
A6. series (2 Nos.) Bill and Receipt
A7 series (2 Nos.) Bill and Receipt.
Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:
B1. Copy of Site Mahazar dt:25.10.2010.
B2. Copy of Consumer's Personal Deposit Register (Page 7).
