By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President:
The case is that the complainant is the managing partner of Hotel Ayodhya. He is living of the income from the said hotel business. He is the consumer of 1st respondent and paying the electricity charge as per bill and no arrears are pending. On 8.2.08 the 3rd respondent issued two notices demanding amounts in both consumer numbers stating back assessment loss bill from 10th month of 2004 to 3rd month of 2005 and the 1st month of 2007 to 3rd month of 2007. Then he approached the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent failed to give satisfactory explanation and misbehaved also. The notices issued by respondents are illegal and unjust. Hence the complaint.
2. The counter averments are that the complainant is not a consumer within the ambit of Consumer Protection Act. He is a commercial consumer. So the dispute is not maintainable before the Forum. There are average consumption of 3600 units in the lodge stated in the complaint. The complainant is conducting the lodge for commercial purposes. The connection to Hotel Ayodhya comes under commercial tariff and the connection is three phase. It is true that back assessment bills have issued to the complainant. The total connected load to consumer No.1016/VII A is 33 KW. Since the meter became sluggish the meter has been replaced on 10.4.05. After replacement of meter the consumption was 2265 units on 4/05. So there found consumption of 2020 units per month. Since the meter was defective these bills are issued for compensate the loss of the Board. The meter to consumer No.788/VIIA was also sluggish and replaced on 12.4.07. The average consumption was 1589 units on replacement of meter. The bills are issued as per terms and conditions of Supply Code. The complainant is liable to pay the bills amount. But not paid so far. There is no deficiency in service from these respondents. Hence dismiss.
3. The points for consideration are that:
(1) Whether the complaint is maintainable before the Forum?
(2) If so reliefs and costs.
4. The evidence consists of oral testimony of PW1, Exts. P1 to P4 and Exts. R1 to R9.
5. Points: The complainant is conducting lodge by name Hotel Ayodhya. He has electric connections vide consumer Nos.1016/VIIA and 788/VIIA. It is his case that he is living out of income derived from the said business. At the same time the respondents contended that the complainant has no right to file complaint before the Consumer Forum because he is a commercial consumer.
6. The complainant is examined as PW1 and deposed that he is conducting hotel business and he is the managing partner. He deposed that he has two other hotels and there are 25 rooms. So the case of complainant that he is living out of the income derived from the business of hotel Ayodhya is seen incorrect. It is his version that he has two other hotels. There is no explanation with regard to the income derived from three lodges for the livelihood. It can be seen that the complainant is a commercial consumer and have no right to approach the consumer Forum for redressal of his grievance. On this ground the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
7. The dispute has arisen because of defect of the power meter. PW1 also admitted the replacement of the meter. In these circumstances as stated by the Hon’ble National Commission the remedy is to approach the Electrical Inspector. In 2012 (1) CPJ Page 216 it is held that the correct course for a consumer with a dispute regarding the correctness of an electricity meter or of the billed electricity consumption would apply to the Electrical Inspector designated. So the Forum has no power to consider and dispose the case. On this ground also the complaint is not maintainable.
8. In the result the complaint stands dismissed.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 28th day of May 2012.
