By Sri. Saji Mathew, Member. The gist of the complaint is as follows: The complainant is the consumer of Consumer No.4050 connected on 31.5.89. She has been duly paying the current bills. In 2002 the building was rebuilt and application was Contd.....2) .2. made over to KSEB to transfer connection to the new building. An additional power point plug was installed in the new building and this fact was duly informed to the opposite parties in writing. In the new building, current bills were issued at revised rate. Spot bills were issued showing the exact consumption and the exact charge. The complainant has duly paid all the bills. On 5.7.06 an additional bill of Rs.5,918/- was issued to the complainant asking the complainant to pay an additional current charge for the period from 6/89 to 5/06. The opposite party has billed for a period of 17 years even though the complainant was duly paying the regular bills. So the additional bill is issued without any grounds. The complainant has given complaint in writing to the Senior Superintendent, KSEB Manathavady. But the complainant was compelled to pay this amount with interest. So the complainant prays for an order directing the opposite party to cancel the bill amount and its interest and allowing cost of the petition to the complainant. 2. The opposite parties appeared and filed version. They state that Consumer No. 4050 is provided to the Convent of the complainant which was registered in the name of Sister Superior. The connected load was 1.585 Kilo Watts. The building comes under the tariff category of L.T. VI A that consists of two parts. The first part of the same is fixed charge and the other part is consumption charge based on actual reading in the meter. The fixed charge is calculated on the basis of the connected load of the consumer. The connection was transfered to the newly constructed building on the request of the complainant in 2002 and the connected load also changed. The new connected load was fixed as 2.545 KW after proper inspection. The opposite parties have issued a bill for Rs.5,918/- since the said amount was found to be due from the complainant. It was traced out by the audit conducted by the Regional Audit Officer during 06/2006. The complainant was paying fixed charged only for 1 KW from the date of connection while liability was for 2 KW till 20.2.02 and for 3 KW thereafter. The bill for Contd.....3) .3. Rs.5,918/- is issued without levying any interest or penal charge. The last date for the payment of bill was 22-7-06, The complainant paid the amount only on 22-11-06, so for the period from 22-7-06 to 22-11-06.. Was collected as interest. The opposite party states that the bill has been issued for the consumption of electricity and not for any other purpose. So they pray that the complaint may be dismissed. 3. The complainant was examined as PW1 and documents were marked as Ext. A1 to A5 Asst. Executive Engineer, Manathavady was examined as OPW1. No documents marked on the side of the opposite party. 4. The points in consideration are as follows: 1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief. Point No.1: In the version it is stated that the amount of Rs.5,918/- was found due from the complainant. This due amount was found out by the audit conducted by the Regional Audit officer during June 2006. The version says that the consumer was paying fixed charges only for 1 KW from the date of connection which the liability was to pay fixed charges for 2 KW till 20-2-02. After 20-2-02 the complainant was paying fixed charges for 2 KW. The opposite party states that the complainant was not paying this fixed charge for the said period due to the mistake in calculation. The complainant has been regularly paying the bills issued. By the mistake of on the side of opposite parties, the complainant was put to difficulty and was made to pay current charges for a period 17 years is lumpsum. This is clearly deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. So, the point No.1 is found against the opposite parties. Contd....4.) .4. 6. Point No.2. As it is found that the complainant has been put to suffering due to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, Point No.2 is found in favor of the complainant. In case of a mistake in calculation the opposite party can claim fixed charge at the appropriate rate for a period of 3 years at maximum prior to the bill. In this case, the arrear for 3 years is found as Rs.1,440/- (36X40) as per the version. As per Ext.A5 the opposite parties has collected Rs.6,424/- from the complainant. After deducting Rs.1,440/-, the balance amount Rs.4,984/- is found collected improperly by the opposite party. This amount is to be adjusted to the future current bills of the complainant. No compensation is ordered. The opposite party is also directed to pay cost of petition to the complainant Rs.500/- Hence the opposite party is directed to adjust Rs.4984+500 to the future current bills of the complainant. The complainant can execute the order as per the provisions of law. Pronounced in the open Forum on the day of 31st May 2008.
