O R D E R Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President. Case of the petitioner, filed on 4..2..2009 is as follows: Petitioner is a consumer of the opposite party Electricity Board with vide Consumer No. A 42 of second opposite party. Opposite party issued demand cum disconnection notice on 1..1..2009, demanding an amount of Rs. 2,548/-, alleged to be the dues during the meter faulty period from April 2002 to August 2005. According to the petitioner issuance of the demand cum disconnection notice, without evidence of faulty meter, is illegal and is liable to be set aside. Petitioner claims cost and compensation of the proceedings. Opposite party entered appearance and filed version contenting that the petition is not maintainable. According to the opposite party energy meter -2- installed for the consumer was faulty from 1997. Meter was changed on 26..4..2005 inspection team charged short assessment bill for the meter faulty period from 4/01 to 6/05. Bill was issued based on the consumption recorded after changing faulty meter with a fault free meter. So, according to the opposite party the demand of the bill for under charged portion is legal and there is no deficiency in service on their part. They pray for dismissal of the petition with their costs. Points for determinations are: i) Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? ii) Relief and costs? Evidence in this case consists of affidavit filed by the petitioner and Ext. A1 document on the side of the petitioner and Ext. B1 document on the side of the opposite party. Point No. 1 According to the opposite party bill is issued on the basis of the consumption by taking the average consumption after replacement of the faulty meter, for under charged portion. Regulation 33 (2) of the KSEB terms and conditions of supply states that 2005 if the board is unable to raise a bill due to non recording or malfunctioning board shall issue a bill based on the previous six months average consumption in such case the meter shall be replaced within one month. If the average consumption for the previous six month cannot be -3- taken due to meter ceasing to record consumption, consumption will be determined based on meter reading in succeeding 3 months after replacement of faulty meter. Here opposite party has no case that consumption for previous six months cannot be taken. Board has not adduced any evidence to prove the same. Further more, the faulty meter was not replaced within one month. So, in our view act of the opposite party in issuing the bill for under charged portion without complying regulation 33 (2) of conditions of supply it is clear deficiency in service. So, point No. 1 is found accordingly. Point No. 2 In view of the finding in point No. 1 petition is allowed. In the result bill Dtd: 1..1..2009 for an amount of Rs. 2548/- is cancelled. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case no cost and compensation is ordered. Dictated by me transcribed by the Confidential Assistant corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 25th day of May, 2010. Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/- Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member Sd/- APPENDIX Documents for the Petitioner Ext. A1: Copy of bill Dtd: 1..1..2009 Documents for the opposite party: Ext. B1: Copy of the meter reading register. By Order, Senior Superintendent
| | HONORABLE Bindhu M Thomas, Member | HONORABLE Santhosh Kesava Nath P, PRESIDENT | , | | 
