By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,<br /> <br /> 1. It is the say of complainant that he is conducting a bunk shop of 'Milma' for earning his livelihood by self employment. Though the electricity connection to this shop was to be charged only under L.T.VII B tariff opposite party by mistake fixed the tariff as VII A at the time of availing connection in 1998. After repeated requests opposite party revised the tariff to L.T.VII B on 14-6-2001. Due to negligence of opposite party in fixing tariff complainant had to pay excess charges under L.T. VII A from date of connection till 14-6-2001. Though he requested to opposite party for refund of the excess amount collected it was not heeded to. Hence this complaint alleging deficiency in service and praying for refund of the amount collected in excess under L.T.VII A from date of connection till 14-6-2001, and to adjust the same to his future bills.<br /> <br /> 2. Opposite party filed version admitting that electric connection was provided on 26-8-1998 to complainant for running commercial establishment. He was grouped under L.T. VII A as per Completion Report submitted by him and the connected load furnished in that report at the time of availing connection. The connected load at the time of availing connection was 1220 watts. As per tariff notification if the connected load is above 1000 W the consumer is to be grouped under L.T. VII A. Later complainant reduced the connected load and requested to classify him under VII B. On inspection and verification it was found that the connected load was reduced to 600 watts. Hence the tariff was changed from VII A to VII B with effect from 6/2001. The application fee for tariff change was remitted by him on 14-6-2001. The other averments are denied as false. Since from the date of connection till 6/2001 the connected load of the complainant was above 1000 W he was billed under VII A which is proper and legal. Complainant is not entitled to any refund or adjustment of amount. Complaint is to be dismissed.<br /> <br /> 3. Evidence consists of affidavit filed by complainant and Exts.A1 to A3 marked on his side. Opposite party has filed counter affidavit and Exts.B1 to B4 marked.<br /> <br /> 4. Points for consideration:-<br /> (i) Whether opposite party is deficient in service.<br /> (ii) If so, reliefs and costs.<br /> <br /> 5. Point (i):-<br /> The grievance of the complainant is that at the time of availing connection he belonged to LT VII B tariff, but opposite party wrongly fixed his tariff as L.T. VII A. After repeated requests his tariff was changed to L.T. VII B with effect from 14-6-2001. In this complaint he prays for the refund of excess amount collected by opposite party from the date of connection till 14-6-2001 under the wrong tariff of L.T.VII A. The only issue before us is whether complainant was to be included in L.T. VII B tariff from the date of connection itself. The charges of electricity under L.T. VII A is higher than L.T.VII B. though both these tariffs are regarding commercial establishments the difference lies in the total connected load of the service connection. In a commercial establishment if load exceeds 1000 Watts the consumers are to be charged under L.T. VII A. If the connected load does not exceed 1000 watts the tariff applicable is L.T. VII B. Opposite party relied upon Exts.B2 and B3 and contended that at the time of availing connection the total connected load of complainant was 1220 watts and hence was charged under L.T.VII A tariff. In Ext.B2 which is the Completion Report filed by complainant prior to receiving connection the total connected load is 1220 watts. It is also the case of opposite party that later complainant reduced his connected load to 600 watts and therefore after verification and inspection of the premises his tariff was changed to L.T. VII B with effect from 14-6-2001. Ext.B3 is the Completion Report where the total connected load is shown as 600 watts.<br /> <br /> 6. As against this, it was submitted on behalf of complainant that his connected load from the date of connection itself is 600 watts only and not 1220 watts. Complainant disputed his signature in Ext.B2 and contended that the document is forged. The originals of Ext.B2 and B34 were produced by opposite party as per orders in I.A.79/08 filed by complainant for production of the documents. On perusal the original documents tally with Ext.B2 and B3 which are only photocopies. Further Ext.B2 and B3 were produced by opposite party along with the version. We do not find any ground to discredit the genuineness of these documents. It is clearly stated in Ext.B2 that the total connected load is 1220 watts. Opposite party has put forward a consistent case and has established it by Ext.B2 and B3 documents. It is proved that complainant belonged to the category of L.T.VII A at the time of availing connection. Complainant has failed to establish a case in his favour. We therefore do not find any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.<br /> <br /> 7. In the result we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.<br /> <br /> Dated this 6th day of October, 2008.<br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> <br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil <br /> Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A3<br /> Ext.A1 : Cash bill for Rs.10,296/- dated, 14-11-1998.<br /> Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the request dated, 05-4-2001 by<br /> complainant to opposite party.<br /> Ext.A3 : Demand and Disconnection notice by opposite party to complainant.<br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1 to B4<br /> Ext.B1 : Photo copy of the request dated, 05-4-2001 by<br /> complainant to opposite party.<br /> Ext.B2 : Photo copy of the Completion Certificate.<br /> Ext.B3 : Photo copy of the Completion Report<br /> Ext.B4 : Photo copy of the Gazette Notification dated, 7-8-01.<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER