C.K Anil Kumar Proprietor Huts Restaurent filed a consumer case on 10 Apr 2008 against Assistant Executive Engineer,KSEB in the Alappuzha Consumer Court. The case no is CC/49/2007 and the judgment uploaded on 30 Nov -0001.
1. JIMMY KORAH 2. K.Anirudhan 3. Smt;Shajitha Beevi
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER) The complainant Sri.C.K.Anilkumar, Proprietor, M/s.Huts Restaurant, Near N.H. Bye Pass Junction, CMC 22, Cherthala has filed complaint before this Forum, alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party Kerala State Electricity Board; represented by Asst. Exe. Engineer, Electrical Major Section, Cherthala. The contentions of the complainant is that on 21.11.2006 some persons came to his highly reputed restaurant at Cherthala Town and claimed to be the members of the Anti Power Theft squad, Kozhikode and they alleged that the seal of the electricity meter were fake and they disconnected the electric connection of the said Restaurant and taken possession of the electricity meter in question and imposed fine of Rs.65,960/- to the complainant towards the electricity duty price of the meter testing fee, reconnection fee etc. Under protest. On 22.11.2006 the complainant remitted the said amount and the opposite party has given reconnection to the said unit on 22.11.2006 itself. After that the complainant has filed this complaint for an order for refund of the said amount with compensation for loss of reputation, good will, disgrace etc. 2. Notice was issued to the opposite parties and they entered appearance and filed version. This Forum has perused the complaint, proof affidavits, records and heard the matter in detail. It is stated that the electric supply was given to the complainants restaurant which is a highly reputed restaurant, as stated by the complainant; and the dispute is arising in connection with the theft of electricity. So the complaint is not maintainable due to the above matter. In this context, we are of the view that the complainant is the proprietor of the Huts Restaurant and using electricity for the said firm and it is for commercial purposes and not for his personal purpose. Hence the complainant will not come under the definition of Consumer under section 2 (d) ii of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and it is to be dismissed. In the light of the facts stated above, the complaint is dismissed. No order as costs. Pronounced in open Forum on this the 10th day of April, 2008. Sd/- SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN: Sd/- SRI. JIMMY KORAH: APPENDIX:- Nil Sd/- SMT. N. SHAJITHA BEEVI: // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Oppo.parties/S.F. Typed by:-pr/- Compared by:-