By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:<br /> <br /> <br /> The complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.<br /> <br /> <br /> The gist of the complaint is as given below.<br /> <br /> The Complainant is a consumer of electricity connection with No.2925. The average consumption of the energy is around 250 units. The amount charged for the use of energy comes to 580 units. The Complainant received a bill on 23.4.2005 with the consumption of 1538 units and demanded the sum of Rs.9,107/-. Ever since the electricity connection was in use of the Complainant the highest bill received is Rs.868/-. The Complainant lodged a <br /> complaint before the 2nd Opposite Party and in respect of that a spot inspection was<br /> (Contd........2)<br /> - 2 -<br /> conducted by the 1st Opposite Party. The report submitted in pursuance of the inspection was that electric meter tested and found O.K. Later the Complainant filed an another petition dated 07.05.2005 to the 2nd Opposite Party to cut short the amount charged. The meter was again tested by the 1st Opposite Party on the thorough checking the current coil of the one phase of the meter was not working and the report submitted in it's effect that “the excess demanded raised non due to the fault of the consumer”. The meter install in the premises found to be faulty has a result the excess consumption of units is mistakenly recorded. The Complainant was compelled to pay the amount by the Opposite Party under the clout of disconnection threat. The Complainant remitted the amount under protest on 16.5.2005. The Complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.9,107/- towards unwarranted and exorbitant amount collected from him. There may be an order directing the Opposite Party to pay the Complainant sum of Rs.9,107/- towards the excess amount collected from the Complainant with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of payment, till the date of realisation and also to pay Rs.2,500/- towards compensation along with cost of the Complaint.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Party filed version. The complaint is not maintainable in law. The Kerala State Electricity Board is a statutory organization and the Secretary, Kerala State Electricity Board is the competent authority to sue and to be sued for and in behalf of K.S.E.B as per rule 1 & 2 of order XXIX of the Civil Procedure Code . The Complainant is a domestic consumer with the consumer No.2925. There is a variation in the use of electric energy from time to time. The spot bill for the bimonthly consumption of 1538 units is used by the Complainant and a bill was issued demanding Rs.9,107/-. The genuineness of the bill was <br /> questioned and a petition was filed by the Complainant to the Assistant Engineer, Electrical (Contd.........3)<br /> 3 -<br /> <br /> Section Pulpally. The Assistant Engineer inspected the meter in two occasions. In the first examination of the meter, the meter found to be correct later upon the petition of the Complainant the meter was again tested and one phase of the meter found not working. The amount of Rs.9,107/- was demanded from the Complainant towards the unit of electricity used. The meter became faulty only after 4/2005, the defect found in the meter is that the current coil of the one phase of the meter was not working. The bill was issued basing on the actual consumption of the electric energy and the spot bills were issued to the Complainant as per rules. The complaint is not maintainable and is to be dismissed.<br /> <br /> The points in consideration are.<br /> 1.Whether the complaint is not maintainable due to the non joinder of necessary parties?.<br /> 2.Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?.<br /> 3.Relief and cost.<br /> <br /> Point No.1: <br /> The Opposite Party in their version contented that the complaint is not maintainable due to non joinder of necessary parties. The Secretary, Kerala State Electricity Board is the <br /> competent authority to sue and to be sued and that is cited in the version. The Complainant has not taken any steps to supplement the Secretary, Kerala State Electricity Board as the Opposite Party. The complaint is devoid of necessary parties and found defective on the ground of the non joinder of necessary parties. The point No.1 is found accordingly.<br /> <br /> (Contd.........4)<br /> - 4 -<br /> Point No.2 and 3: <br /> The Complainant itself is bad for the non joinder of necessary parties and the<br /> <br /> consideration of point No.1 and 2 are not necessary.<br /> <br /> <br /> In the result, the complaint is dismissed no order upon cost.<br /> <br /> <br /> Pronounced in open Forum on this the 8th day of May 2008.