BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 07/08/2008
Date of Order : 29/07/2011
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
C.C. No. 424/2009
Between
K.K. Shibu, | :: | Complainant |
Kambathu House, Thankalam, Kothamangalam. P.O. |
| (By Adv. Tom Joseph, Court Road, Muvattupuzha – 686 661) |
And
1. Kerala State Electricity Board, | :: | Opposite parties |
Rep. by its Chief Executive Officer, Vydyuthi Bhavan, Pattam, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The Assistant Engineer, K.S.E.B. Section No.1, Kothamangalam. |
| (Op.pts. 1 & 2 by Adv. P.B. Asokan, Roll No. K/80/1975, XL/4664, Banerji Road, Kochi - 31) |
O R D E R
Paul Gomez, Member.
1. The short facts of the complaint are the following :
The complainant is running an oil mill and he has been regularly remitting the electricity charges. The 2nd opposite party served a bill to the tune of Rs. 66,227/- (Rupees Sixty six thousand two hundred and twenty seven only) towards reassessment charges as per Audit Report. The complainant is of the view that he is not liable to pay the bill amount. The 2nd opposite party had already collected half of the bill amount for the period of 6/2007 and 2/2008. Hence, it is prayed to set aside the said bill and ask the opposite parties to pay the cost.
2. On the other hand, the averments of the complainant has been denied by the 2nd opposite party in his version. The bill has been issued on the recommendation of the Assistant Accounts Officer made in his report. The averment stating that half of the bill amount was already collected is denied. It was found that there was a connected load of 19 KW, when the consumer was only to avail 15 KW. The penal bill is based on the aforesaid unauthorised connected load. They have admitted that some mistake in calculation has occurred and have slashed the amount in the bill to Rs. 42,345/- from 66,227/-. The amount under the head of back assessment due to abnormal meter reading amounting to Rs. 6,318/- has been already remitted by the complainant. There is no deficiency on the part of the opposite parties in demanding Rs. 42,345/- to be paid by the complainant, because the levy is justified under the provisions of the Electricity Act.
3. There was no oral evidence for the complainant, except marking of Exts. A1 to A3. The 2nd opposite party filed version. The learned counsel appearing for the parties were heard.
4. The short points for consideration :-
Whether Ext. A2 demand notice issued to the complainant is valid?
What are the reliefs, if any?
5. Point Nos. i. and ii. :- Ext. A2 bill was issued to the complainant on the basis of calculations made in Ext. A2 audit report. The total claim of Rs. 66,227/- is computed under two counts :
Load regularization charge.
Back assessment for 1801 units.
6. In the version filed by the 2nd opposite party, the claim amount has been reduced to Rs. 42,345/- on the recalculation. The details of calculation are given in the version. It is also admitted that the complainant has already paid Rs. 6,318/- towards back assessment charges for 1801 units. The amount now the complainant is asked to pay is Rs. 42,345/-. The calculation of difference in units made at page 3rd of the version appears incorrect. Corresponding changes have to be carried out in the arrears due. In Ext. C1 against the column on 2/2008, it is recorded that one phase is not working. Now 2nd opposite party contends that that recording is not correct, but it was only a mistake and actually the meter was faulty for the month of 2/2008. This finding appears not based on any valid ground. No material has been produced before us to prove the same. Therefore, we delete the calculation pertaining to 2/2008 and assessed amount shall be corrected to that figure with reference to 22568 units only. Consequently, the complainant need pay only Rs. 32,358.50. When one peruses Ext. A3 series bills, it is obvious that the 2nd opposite party have been levying charges in respect of unauthorised connected load which is abbreviated as UAC from May 2007 onwards. Obviously, the amount collected on that score must be deducted from Rs. 32,359/-.
6. To conclude, we allow the complaint as follows :
Ext. A2 penal bill dated 08-07-2009 stands set aside.
The 2nd opposite party shall issue fresh penal bill to the complainant after taking into account the short falls that are indicated elsewhere in the order in respect of the impugned bill.
The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 29th day of July 2011.
