BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 21/02/2012

Date of Order : 31/10/2012

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

C.C. No. 101/2012

Between

And

O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. The case of the complainants is as follows :-

The complainants 2 and 3 are the daughters of the 1^st complainant. On 04-07-2011, the 1^st complainant purchased 1.33 ares of land in Ernakulam Village with building therein. The 2^nd complainant and her husband and the 3^rd complainant purchased the adjoining property of 1.33 ares each on the same day with the electrical connections therein. On 06-02-2012, at about 3.30 p.m. certain persons came to the property of the complainants and disconnected the electrical supply to the buildings of the complainants without any notice. On 07-01-2012, the 1^st complainant submitted a written complaint before the opposite parties. But there was no response. The 3^rd opposite party gave a reply dated 10-02-2012 stating untenable contentions. In spite of repeated complaints, the opposite parties failed to restore the electricity connection. Thus, the complainants are before us seeking direction against the opposite parties to restore the electric connections and to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- per day from 06-02-2012 till the date of restoration of electric supply together with compensation of Rs. 1 lakh for the mental agony and sufferings undergone by the complainants due to the disconnection of electric supply. This complaint hence.

2. The version of the opposite parties is as follows :-

5 electric connections in different usage were granted to the building, which is stated as follows:

Sl. No.	Consumer No.	Registered owner	Tariff	Connected load
	42137	Chandrasekharan. P.K.	LT VII A	1880w
	42138	Santha P.K.	LT VII A	2000w
	42139	Parvathy	LT Ia	800w
	7807	Asok Kumar	LT VII b	560w
	9293	Asok Kumar	LT VII b	480w

On 06-02-2012, the field officers of the opposite party found that some unauthorised electrical people are fitting and connecting electrical meters in different locations of the building without any information or submitting any fitness certificate to the office of the opposite parties. A detailed investigation was conducted by the 4^th opposite party. The unauthorised electricians shifted the locations of electric meters without the consent or knowledge of the opposite parties. They drew the service wires of all service connections through service pipe at the new location of the building and connected to the electric meters, which is very dangerous to the electricians and to the public at large, since it was very close to the public path way. As per clause 38 (1) (E) of the terms and conditions of supply 2005, the supply was disconnected after the preparation of a site mahazar. The 4^th opposite party tried to serve a copy of the site mahazar to the site supervisor of the complainants. But he did not accept the same. So, a copy of the site mahazar was affixed on the building. The complainants submitted an application on 10-02-2012 requesting to reconnect the electric supply. The complainants were directed to submit test and commission report of an approved electrical contractor. But they did not do so. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

3. Proof affidavit has been filed by the 1^st complainant. Exts. A1 to A9 were marked on the side of the complainants. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the opposite parties. Heard the learned counsel for the complainants.

4. The points that came up for consideration are as follows :-

1. Whether the complainants are entitled to get reconnection of the electric connections?

2. Whether the complainants are entitled to get a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- per day from 06-02-2012 till the date of reconnection of electric supply?

3. Whether the complainants are entitled to get compensation and costs of the proceedings from the opposite parties?

5. Point No. i. :- At the instance of the complainants, this Forum in I.A. No. 110/2012 passed the following order on 06-03-2012, which reads as follows :

“Parties represented. The complainant produced the original test and completion certificates along with necessary copies in respect of 5 connections as directed by this Forum vide order dated 02/03/2012 which was perused by the representative of the opposite parties. On perusal, he has expressed his satisfaction with regard to the present condition of the premises for electrical reconnection. He also disclosed his willingness to reconnect, in case reconnection is ordered by this Forum. As we are satisfied that as of now, there is no reason for any apprehension as to hazards to life and property, we do not find any impediment in allowing this I.A. Ordered accordingly and the 3^rd opposite party is directed to effect the reconnection in respect of consumer Nos. 4137, 4138, 4139 and 7807 and 9293 on or before 07-03-2012.”

The opposite parties duly complied with the above direction of this Forum. Therefore, further discussion on this point is not at all warranted.

6. Admittedly on 06-02-2012, the 4^th opposite party visited the premises of the complainants and prepared Ext. A6 mahazar. In Ext. A6, the 4^th opposite party has noticed certain anomalies in the electrical connections drawn. According to them, it was hazardous to public life. The complainants vehemently disputed the findings by the 4^th opposite party in Ext. A6. According to the complainants, the opposite parties acted against the terms and conditions of the Electricity Act and Rules.

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Punjab Electricity Board Vs. Ashwini Kumar IV (2010) CPJ SC, held that, “The inspection report is a document prepared in exercise of its official duties by the officers of the Corporation. Once an act is done in accordance with law, the presumption is in favour of such act or document and not against the same. Thus, there was specific onus upon the consumer to rebut by leading proper and cogent evidence that the report prepared by the officers was not correct. As already noticed, no objections were filed to the said report except some protest, that too, without stating as to what was the specific protest about, whether the facts recorded in the report were factually incorrect or that the report was received under protest. As is apparent from the report on record, it bears two signatures of the consumer/consumer's representatives, one with regard to the preparation of report and other with regard to receiving the copy of the report. The words 'under protest' have been recorded at the bottom of the report. This, itself indicates the ambiguity in the protest raised by the consumers”.

8. The above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court squarely applies in this case. There is no evidence to controvert the findings of the 4^th opposite party in Ext. A6 mahazar nor anywhere else. The gesture of co-operation shown by the Assistant Executive Engineer, who represented the opposite parties is highly appreciable and this Forum does so, especially since, he went to submit before this Forum that the opposite parties are ready to resume the Electricity connection, if this Forum directs so.

9. Point Nos. ii. & iii. :- In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. So, we refrain from awarding compensation and costs of the proceedings to the complainant.

10. It is made clear that the complainants are entitled to get transferred the electric connections in their favour as per norms. In view of the above, the proceedings in this complaint stands closed.

Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 31^st day of October 2012.

Forwarded/By order, Sd/- A. Rajesh, President.

Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

Senior Superintendent.

A P P E N D I X

Complainant's Exhibits :-

Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil

=========