Kerala

Kottayam

CC/08/48

B.Girish - Complainant(s)

Versus

Assistant Exicutive Engeer - Opp.Party(s)

Ranjit.S.

30 Jan 2010

ORDER


Report
CDRF, Collectorate
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/48

B.Girish
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Assistant Exicutive Engeer
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Bindhu M Thomas 2. K.N Radhakrishnan 3. Santhosh Kesava Nath P

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM
Present:
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President
Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member
CC. No. 48/2008
Saturday, the 30th   day of January, 2010.
Petitioner                                              :           Athreya Ayurvedic Resorts,
Pakkil P.O., Pallom
Kottayam.
Reptd. By its Managing Partner.
Dr. B. Girish.
                                                                        (By Adv. Ranjit. S)
                                                            Vs.
Opposite party                                     :    1)    The KSEB,
Vaidyuthi Bhavan,
Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram.
Reptd. By its Secretary.
 
2)          The Asst. Exe. Engineer,
KSEB, Electrical Section,
Pallim P.O, Pakkil,
Kottayam.
 
 
O R D E R
 
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President.
 
            Both sides represented. Heard both sides. Petitioner disputed provisional assessment Dtd: 10..3..2008 issued by the opposite party under section 126 (2) of Electricity Act 2003. As per Section 126 (3) of Electricity Act 2003, Consumer, on whom a notice under sub section (2) shall be entitled to file objection, if any, against the provisional assessment, before assessing officer, who may, after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to such person, pass a final order. In this case no final order under section 126 (3) was passed by the opposite party. So, petitioners petition itself is premature. However an expert Commissioners report was received in this case, with regard to matter in dispute, from the expert commissioner appointed by the Forum in this
-2-
case. We feel that for just and proper disposal of the   petition, petitioner is to be heard. So, opposite party is directed to give an opportunity to the petitioner for hearing the petitioner within 30 days of receipt of the order and pass a final order in accordance with law by considering the report filed by the expert commissioner. Petition is disposed accordingly with foresaid direction.
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/-      
 
Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member                    Sd/-                 
 
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member                    Sd/-
By Order,
 
Senior Superintendent
amp/     5 cs.    



......................Bindhu M Thomas
......................K.N Radhakrishnan
......................Santhosh Kesava Nath P