KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL NO.535/09 JUDGMENT DATED 4.3.2010 PRESENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA -- MEMBER 1. N.Mukundakumar, Asst.Engineer, KSEB,Section Office, Moolamattom.P.O. 2. Divakaran, Sub Engineer, KSEB Section office, Moolamattom.P.O. 3. P.H.Kabeer, -- APPELLANTS Sub Engineer, KSEB Section office, Moolamattom.P.O. 4. Ganesan, Overseer, KSEB,Section Office, Moolamattom.P.O. 5. Thankamony, KSEB Section office, Moolamattom.P.O. 6. Renjith, Lineman, KSEB,Section Office, Moolamattom.P.O. 7. The Secretary,KSEB Vydhyudhi Bhavan, Pattom, Trivandrum. (By Adv.S.Balachandran) Vs. Johny Francis, Chalackal House, -- RESPONDENT Moolamattom P.O, Idukki. JUDGMENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties in CC.228/06 in the file of CDRF, Idukki. The appellants are under orders to refund a sum of Rs.4950/- and also to pay Rs.2,000/- towards expenses and compensation and also 2,000/- towards costs with interest at 12% the amount is not paid within 30 days of receipt of the copy of this order. 2. The case of the complainant is that he is running a Studio in Moolamattom and was regularly remitting energy charges under VII B tariff. On 14.11.06 the meter reader informed him that the tariff will be changed to VII A. Hence he went to the office of the opposite party’s on 17.11.06 but he could not submit his representation as the Asst. Engineer was not in the office. On 20.11.06 also he could not present the petition as the first opposite party/Asst. Engineer was not present in the office. He then requested the 5th opposite party/officer to receive the application and put up before the first opposite party. The 5th opposite party refused to do the same. Then he made a written complaint in the complaint register. There- after he forwarded the petition through courier service. According to him on account of the vengeance of the first opposite party in lodging the complaint in the complaint register with respect to the absence of the first opposite party from the office on 23.1.06 opposite parties 2to 6 came to the studio and forcibly took some chairs in front of the meter and stood on the chair and the metal seal of the meter was disconnected by cutting with a player. Then they brought a photographer and took the snaps. According to him he was only using equipments that would not exceed 1000 watts. The opposite parties forcibly made him sign in the mahazar and also two other independent witnesses. He was directed to pay Rs.4,950/-. Hence the complaint for refund of the amount as well as compensation. 3. The opposite parties filed version asserting that on 23.11.06 on inspection of the studio of the complainant, it was found that the two security seals were removed from the energy meter and hence he has committed theft of electrical energy. The service connection was disconnected and the meter was dismantled. It is stated that the opposite parties are not aware as to whether the complainant came to the office of the opposite party for giving complaint. It is admitted that it is written in the complaint register that he was not able to file a complaint because the engineer was not present in the office. Subsequently the complaint was received through courier. The penal bill amount was paid. 4. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PW1 & PW2, DW1 and Exts.P1 to P6 and R1. 5. PW2 who is an independent witness to the mahazar has admittedly supported the case of the complainant that it is the opposite parties who tampered the meter and made the complainant responsible. The documents produced showed that consistently the complainant was remitting the energy charges of around Rs.175/-. On appreciation of the evidence the Forum has found that the case of the complainant is true and proved. No patent illegality in the appreciation of evidence by the Forum below has been mentioned in the appeal memorandum. In the circumstances, we find that there is no scope for admitting the appeal. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed in limine. The office is directed to forward the copy of this order to the Forum urgently. JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT M.K.ABDULLA SONA -- MEMBER | 
