IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA,
Dated this the 15th day of May, 2012.
Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President)
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member)
C.C.No.171/2011 (Filed on 28.07.2011)
Between:
V.T. Mathew,
Vallipparampil,
Thekkemala,
Kozhencherry.
(By Adv. Sony. P. Bhaskar) ….. Complainant
And:
1. Asst. Engineer,
K.S.E.B. Section,
Kozhencherry.
2. Asst. Exe. Engineer,
KSEB, Major Section,
Kozhencherry.
3. Deputy Chief Engineer,
KSEB, Circle,
Pathanamthitta. ….. Opposite parties.
O R D E R
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member):
Complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties for getting a relief from the Forum.
2. Facts of the case in brief is as follows: Complainant is a consumer of 1st opposite party for the last 5 years. His consumer No. is 447. He was prompt in paying monthly bills issued by opposite parties.
3. According to him, the officials of opposite parties changed the single phase connection to his nearby shop rooms. The shop rooms were rented to shop owners for the last 6 year. Opposite parties charged commercial tariff for the said consumption of electricity.
4. While so on 31.05 2011, the Division Squad of Electrical Division, Pathanamthitta Divisional Squad came and inspected the complainant’s building. They made an allegation that the said connection is unauthorized and imposed a penalty of ` 73,000 on 28.06.2011 they issued notice to that effect and disconnected it. According to complainant he has been paying commercial tariff for the consumption. After receiving usual payments opposite parties states that his connection is unauthorized and issued penal bill without any basis. He has not liable to pay the unlawful bill. Opposite parties illegally disconnected the complainant’s connection. Therefore as a consumer complainant and his rented shop owners caused mental agony and distress. Hence this complaint for set asiding the bill of ` 73,000 with a compensation of Rs.50,000 and cost.
5. Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version stating that complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. According to them, the connection is registered in the complainant’s name with consumer No.447 and LT VII A tariff now. The connection at the time registered was LT IA and changed to LT VII A during the construction of the complainant’s new house. The location was changed to the wall of a single storey building after the demolition of the old house.
6. At the time of inspection on 31.05.2011, the squad found unauthorized extension of power to a nearby 4 storey building crossing a private road and extended the supply to 4 establishments from the said connection. The said establishments are as follows:
1. Lordwin Studio
2. K-Café
3. Leo Builders
4. Karate & Yoga office
7. Based on the mahazar, the 1st opposite party, the assessing officer comes to the conclusion that the complainant indulged in the unauthorized use of electricity and provisionally assess ` 73,000 and issued bill on 06.06.2011. After that complainant filed objection and 1st opposite party conducted a personal hearing on 23.06.2011. The complainant offered no reliable explanation corroborated by evidence for reassessment. Hence a final order of assessment was served on 28.06.2011 for an amount of ` 73,000. Unauthorised use of electricity is penalized as per the provisions of Electricity Act 2003. Therefore opposite parties canvassed for the dismissal of the complaint with their cost.
8. From the above contention, the following points are raised for consideration:
(1) Whether the complaint is maintainable before the Forum?
(2) Whether the reliefs sought for in the complaint are allowable?
(3) Reliefs & Costs?
9. Evidence of the complaint consists of the oral deposition of PWs.1 to 4, DWs1 and 2 and marked Exts.A1 to A5 and B1. After closure of evidence, both parties were heard.
10. Point Nos. 1 to 3:- In order to prove the complainant’s case, complainant filed proof affidavit along with certain documents. He was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A5. Ext.A1 is the penal notice of ` 73,000 dated 28.06.2011 issued by opposite parties. Ext.A2 is the photocopy of the order in Appeal dated 28.06.2011 against penal notice issued by opposite parties. Ext.A3 to A3(j) series are the 11 electricity bills issued by opposite parties. Ext.A4 is the copy of passport of complainant. Ext.A5 is the rent deed dated 25.06.2007 executed by the owner to complainant.
11. In order to prove the opposite parties contention, 2nd opposite party filed proof affidavit along with one document. He was examined as DW1 and the document produced was marked as Ext.B1. Ext.B1 is the site mahazar prepared by the Division Squad, KSEB, Pathanamthitita.
12. On the basis of the contention and averment of the parties, we have perused the entire material on record. Complainant’s case is that he has been prompt in paying electricity charges to his building which was occupied by rented shop owners. On 31.05.2011 Pathanamthitta Divisional Squad inspected his premises and issued penal bill of ` 73,000 and disconnected the supply alleging that the said connection is unauthorized. According to him, the said penal bill is unlawful and without any basis. The act of opposite parties caused mental agony to him and his rented shop owners. Hence this complaint.
13. Opposite parties contention is that complainant’s connection was LT VII A. At the time of inspection, Divisional squad found unauthorized extension of power to a nearby 4 storey building crossing a private road from the said connection. The unauthorized use of Electricity is to be penalized as per the provisions of Electricity Act 2003. After the inspection, a provisional bill of ` 73,000 had issued on the basis of complainant’s objection a hearing also conducted and confirmed the penal amount in their final order of assessment.
14. On a perusal of Ext.B1, it is learnt that a site mahazar was prepared after the inspection in complainant’s premises. Ext.A1 is the penal notice of Rs. 73,000 issued to complainant by opposite parties. Ext. A2 is the order of Appeal against penal notice based on Exts. A1 and B1. Ext.A3 series are the usual bi-monthly bill of opposite parties issued for which complainant has no dispute.
15. It is seen that the basis of complainant’s dispute is the issuance of Ext.A1 penal notice of ` 73,000. According to him, Ext.A1 is illegal and not bound to pay the same. On a perusal of Ext.A2 and Ext.B1, it is revealed that complainant constructed a new house and a new building and the old electric connection (Con.No.447) is temporarily connected to the wall of an old nearby building at the time of construction of the buildings and charged the tariff for construction purpose. A new electric connection had availed for house after completion of construction. The complainant also constructed a 4 storied commercial building. He availed electricity to this building by extending old electric connection (Con.No.447) from nearby building using PVC wires. Ext.B1 further shows that at the time of inspection, opposite parties found the above unauthorized extension and issued Ext.A1 for 2 KW for previous 1 year. Material on record does not revealed that complainant neither challenged with cogent evidence at the time of hearing on 31.05.2011 conducted by 1st opposite party or before this Forum. Therefore, complainant’s failed in their attempt to disprove the opposite parties case.
16. It is also pertinent to note that the provision of Electricity Act 2003 empowers the opposite parties to penalize the unauthorized use of electricity. In this case, complainant unauthorisedly extended the electricity to nearby 4 storied commercial building. Therefore, we cannot find any illegality or deficiency in issuing Ext.A1. Hence complaint is not allowable and liable to be dismissed.
17. However from the facts and circumstances, it is observed that complainant has the liberty to adopt regularization of the unauthorized extension by complying the requisite formalities if any.
18. In the light of the order of this case, the remittance made by the complainant as per the order in I.A.131/2011can be treated as the part payment of the impuged bill and the complaint is allowed to remit the balance amount of the impugned bill by six equal monthly instalments from the date of receipt of this order. Further as per the order in I.A.167/11the complainant is at liberty to surrender the electric connection involved in this complaint if he desires so and in that event he is liable for the dues only upto 06.01.2012, the date on which this Forum ordered to post the said I.A was posted along with the main case.
19. In the result, this complaint is dismissed with the above direction. No cost.
Declared in the Open Forum on this the 15th day of May, 2012.
(Sd/-)
N. Premkumar,
(Member)
Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) : (Sd/-)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member) : (Sd/-)
Appendix:
Witness examined on the side of the complainant:
PW1 : V.T. Mathew.
PW2 : Priya. G.S.
PW3 : Mathews George.
PW4 : Binu. C. Abraham.
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
A1 : Penal notice of Rs.73,000 dated 28.06.2011 issued
by opposite parties.
A2 : Photocopy of the order in Appeal dated 28.06.2011 against
penal notice issued by opposite parties.
A3 to A3(j) : Electricity bills issued by opposite parties (11 in number).
A4 : Copy of passport of complainant.
A5 : Rent deed dated 25.06.2007 executed by the owner.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties:
DW1 : O.U. Jayakrishnan.
DW2 : Biju Abraham.
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties:
B1 : Site mahazar prepared by the Division Squad of Electrical
Division, KSEB, Pathanamthitita.
(By Order)
(Sd/)
Senior Superintendent
Copy to:- (1) V.T. Mathew, Vallipparampil, Thekkemala, Kozhencherry.
(2) Asst. Engineer, K.S.E.B. Section, Kozhencherry.
(3) Asst. Exe. Engineer, KSEB, Major Section, Kozhencherry.
(4) Deputy Chief Engineer, KSEB, Circle, Pathanamthitta.
(5) The Stock File.
