Kerala

Malappuram

OP/03/292

THEKKATH HAMSAKKOYA - Complainant(s)

Versus

ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSEB - Opp.Party(s)

SHAMSUDHEEN. K

30 Aug 2007

ORDER


DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
B2 BLOCK, CIVIL STATION, PIN-676 505
consumer case(CC) No. OP/03/292

THEKKATH HAMSAKKOYA
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSEB
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


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.

 

By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,


 

1. Complainant is a consumer for electricity supply under opposite party for domestic purpose. That in 1999 opposite party issued an additional bill. On permission to remit the amount in instalments complainant paid the first instalment. Thereafter the supply was disconnected in December, 2000 without notice. That on 6th October, 2003 opposite party issued a calculation list of arrears by which complainant was directed to pay Rs.10,878/-. On request complainant was permitted to remit the amount by six instalments. Complainant paid the first instalment of Rs.3,000/- on 10-10-2003, and the supply was restored. That complainant is not liable to pay the amount demanded as per the said calculation list. Hence this complaint alleging deficiency in service.

     

2. Opposite party filed version admitting the complainant to be a consumer. That the addition bill in 1999 was issued for the excess consumption of energy after deducting the fixed charges remitted regularly by the consumer. Though he was then given instalment facility to remit this amount the complainant defaulted after paying the first instalment. The supply was disconnected for this reason. On 6-10-2003 notice was served tot he consumer for Rs.10,878/- which included the balance of previous additional bill and arrears till date. In this notice for the period 12/2000 to 9/03 during which the supply was disconnected only minimum charges was levied. Again he was given instalment facility and was asked to remit the amount in six instalments. He paid Rs.3,000/- on 10-10-2003 being the first instalment. Thereafter he filed this complaint before the Forum on 6-11-2003 along with petitions for interim relief. That the bills issued are all legal and proper and that complainant is liable to pay charges for the electricity consumed by him. That there is no deficiency in service and complaint is to be dismissed.

     

3. Evidence consists of the affidavit filed by complainant and Exts.A1 and A2 series marked for him. Counter affidavit filed by opposite party and Exts.B1 to B3 marked for opposite party.

     

4. Though complainant states that he was served with an additional bill in 1999 he has neither produced this bill nor has he stated specific grounds on which he challenges the legality of this bill. In fact he has requested opposite party to permit him to pay the amount of that bill by instalments. Even going by the averments of the complaint it is seen that the amounts of Rs.10,878/- demanded by opposite party is by way of arrears due to default in paying charges regularly including surcharge and duty. Ext.A2 series are the bills issued by opposite party from 2001 till 2003. Complainant has no case that he paid these amounts. He has not produced any receipts to evidence payment. Ext.A2 series would corroborate the contention of opposite party that only minimum charges have been demanded for the period during which supply was disconnected. In the calculation list it is seen that all these amounts are in arrears. It is a clear case where the consumer has approached the forum by defaulting the payment of charges. It was submitted that on the strength of the interim order in I.A.221/03 whereby opposite party was restrained from disconnecting the supply complainant has not been paying electricity charges. We do not find any merit in the contentions raised by the complainant. The benevolent provisions of the Consumer Protection Act cannot be misused to escape payment of electricity charges. Complainant has failed to establish a case in his favour. We do not find any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.

     

5. In the result we dismiss the complaint. Opposite party is at liberty to recover the amount due from the complainant. We make no order as to costs.

     

          Dated this 8th day of May, 2009.


 


 


 

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT


 


 

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER


 


 


 


 

APPENDIX


 


 

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 and A2 series

Ext.A1 : Receipt for Rs.3,000/- dated, 10-10-2003 from opposite party

to complainant.

Ext.A2series : Bills issued from 2001 till 2003 by opposite party to complainant.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1 to B3

Ext.B1 : Photo copy of the meter reading extract relating to consumer No. 4729

for the period from 12/85 to 2/2000.

Ext.B2 : Photo copy of the details of arrears relating to consumer No.4729

Ext.B3 : Photo copy of the order dated, 10-10-2003 by opposite party to complainant.


 


 


 


 

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT


 


 

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER