BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Dated this the 30th day of September 2011 Filed on : 22-08-2009
Present :
Shri. A Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member
C.C. No. 453/2009
Between
M/s. Lansea Food (P) Ltd., : Complainant
10/438, Cheriyakadavu, (By Adv. George Cherian Karippaparambil,
Kannamally, rep. by its director Karippaparambil Associates, HB-48,
Santhosh Joseph, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi-682 036)
S/o. K.B. Joseph.
And
Kerala State Electricity Board, : Opposite party
Electrical Circle, (By Adv. P.B. Ashokan,
Power House road, XL/4664, Banerji road,
Ernakulam, Ernakulam, Kochi-682 031)
Rep. by the Executive Engineer.
O R D E R
A Rajesh, President.
The Case of the complainant is as follows:
The complainant is a seafood processing company having an European Union accredited factory in Kumbalangi Village, Ernakulam district. The complainant has a High Tension power connection provided by the opposite party since 1994. The average monthly bill of the complainant is around Rs. 2 lakhs. Due to the financial crises in the sea food industry, and the recession in the overseas market the complainant’s factory was closed down and the opposite party had disconnected the power supply to the premises from December 2008. The complainant has been making sincere and concerted efforts for reviving the unit and had been doing the maintenance of the machinery in the unit. In the meanwhile the complainant received a notice dated 03-08-2009 from the opposite party on 08-08-2009 informing the complainant that the connection would be dismantled within 15 days of receipt of the notice i.e. on 23-08-2009. The complainant approached the opposite party with a representation dated 18-08-2009 not to dismantle the service connection with a request to permit the complainant to remit the dues in 10 instalments and sought for the payment of first instalment from 20th September 2009. The opposite party informed the complainant that if payment is not made in lump sum as demanded in the notice the service of the complainant, would be dismantled. However the KSEB regulations provide for remitting the dues in instalments. Thus the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite party
i. to keep the notice No. AE1/HT/GNL/09-01/236 dated 03-08-2009 in abeyance.
ii. to direct the opposite party not to dismantle the service connection and further to direct the opposite party to receive the electricity charges in 10 instalments.
2. Version of the opposite party
The complainant is not a consumer under Consumer Protection Act. As the complainant defaulted the payment of monthly Current charge, the Special Officer (Revenue) vide his letter No. HTB 28/3286/373 dated 15-06-2009 issued an arrear notice for an amount of Rs. 7,04,618/- (being the current charge from 11/08 to 04/2009 including interest) and dismantling notice issued. Even then the amount was not remitted by the complainant. So the special Officer (Revenue), the billing authority in the matter instructed to dismantle the service connection observing the rules in this regard. Had the complainant filed representation for instalment facility, it could have been forwarded to the special Officer (Revenue) for sanction and further necessary action. In the order dated 22-08-2009, in I.A. No. 412/2009 this Hon’ble Forum, has directed the complainant to remit Rs. 1.50,000/- for reconnection, but the complainant remitted only Rs. 1 lakh instead. The arrears due from the consumer is Rs. 7,04,618/- which includes the interest. The security Deposit in respect of the consumer with the Board is Rs. 3,55,860/-. The opposite party had attended the hearing of this Hon’ble Forum and this Forum directed on 05-12-2009 to dismantle the connection since the petitioner had failed to remit the amount of Rs. 1.5 lakhs as ordered by the Hon’ble Forum. Subsequently the service connection was dismantled on 07-12-2009. The complainant is not entitled to get any of the reliefs as sought for in the complaint.
3. Complainant was examined as PW1. Exts. A1 to A7 were marked on the complainant’s side. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the opposite party. Heard the counsel for the complainant.
4. The points that enunciated for consideration are
i.Whether the complainant is a consumer?
ii. Whether the complainant is entitled to get instalment facility to remit the electricity charge dues?
5. Point No. i. In view of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Appex court in Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation and Another V. Ashok Iron Works Private Ltd. (2009) 3 SCC 214, we are only to hold that the complainant is a consumer and the complaint is maintainable in this forum.
6. Point No.ii. During the proceedings vide order dated 22-08-2009 in I.A. No. 412/2009 this Forum directed the complainant to remit Rs. 1.5 lakhs for reconnection, but he remitted only Rs. One lakh instead. In I.A. No. 604/2009 vide order dated 09-12-2009 the Forum Directed the opposite party to refrain from dismantling the connection. But in the meantime on 07-12-2009 the opposite party had dismantled the connection. It seems that the opposite party had taken a decision to dismantle the same in a hasty manner though not of lack of goodwill visibly.
7. Admittedly the complainant has not disputed the amount in the bill. The only grievance highlighted by the complainant is that the facility of instalment has been denied by the opposite party. the opposite party in their version categorically stated that the complainant has not submitted any application to grant instalments. They further stated that had the complainant submitted an application requesting to grant instalments the same would have been allowed. The positive gesture on the part of the opposite party to consider the grievance of the consumer is applicable. So there arises no question that if the complainant submits an applaudable. So there to that is, an instalment facility the opposite party would reject the same.
8. In view of the above we close the proceedings in this complaint with a direction to the opposite party to consider the application of the complainant to grant instalment facility if he requests so. The amount so far remitted by the complainant shall be adjusted in the future instalments.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 30th day of September 2011
Sd/- A Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
Appendix
Complainant’s exhibits :
Ext. A1 : Copy of Email
A2 : Copy of letter dt. 18-08-2009
A3 : Copy of Demand Draft
A4 : Copy of letter dt. 15/10/2009
A5 : Copy of postal receipt
A6 : Copy of letter dt. 12-11-2009
A7 : Copy of demand draft
Opposite party’s exhibits : Nil
PW1 : Santhosh Joseph
