D.O.F:25/04/2016
D.O.O:13/09/2021
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.No.132/2016
Dated this, the 13th day of September 2021
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
Mr. K.M. Hassainar, Aged 72 years
S/o Mammunhi,
R/at Koipady, Kumbala. P.O : Complainant
Kasaragod Taluk and District.
(Adv: Padmanabha.K)
And
1. Kerala State Electricity Board
Electrical Section, Kumbala
Rep: by Assistant Engineer : Opposite Parties
2. KSEB Ltd
Vydyuthi Bhavan, Pattom
Thiruvanathapuram
Rep/by its Md/Chairman
(Adv: Jithesh Babu.P.K . OP 1 & 2)
ORDER
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER
The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ( as amended ) The facts of the case in brief is that the complainant is a consumer of the Opposite Parties having electric connection bearing consumer No.5751/L T IV- A for his Saw mill ,which is his sole source of income. He is paying the electricity bill regularly. The Opposite Parties issued a short assessment bill dated 4-4-2016demanding payment of Rs.73,701/- for a period from 11/2013 to 06/2015. It was also stated in the bill that the connection will be disconnected on 29-4-2016 , if the amount is not paid before that date.
The complainant submits that the bill dated 4-4-2016 is illegal. The Opposite Parties issued monthly bills according to the power consumption. which is periodically inspected and calculated by the meter reader of Opposite Parties. The complainant promptly paid the entire bill amount including the bills for the period stated in bill dated 4-4-2016 without making default. Issuing an illegal bill and threatening the disconnection of power Supply is service deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties due to which the complainant suffered mental agony. Hence the complaint is filed for a direction to Opposite Parties to withdraw the bill dated 4-4-2016 and to pay compensation and costs.
The opposite parties have entered appearance through their Counsel who filed written statement not maintainable either in facts or in Iaw. The Opposite Parties admitted the electricity connection of the complainant's saw mill and issue of the short assessment bill for Rs. 73,701/- dated 4-4-2016, for the period from 11/2013 to 6/2015. The Opposite Parties submit that the bill under challenge is issued as per Section.134 of Kerala electricity supply code 2014 and in consonation with Kerala Gazette publication dated 14-08-2014 in O.P. No.9/2014 by which direction is issued to the Opposite Parties to take in to account the power factor and accordingly power factor incentive and disincentive has to be applied with a connected load at above 20 KW HT and EHT Consumer. The complainant is coming under the above said category and in such premises with a connected load of 20 KW and above, a TOD meter will be installed .That as per the audit report No: RAO / KSD/Gen. Audit/I Kumbla/2015-2016 of Regional Audit officer who verified the TOD (time of day) meter bill of complainant's connection found that while issuing electricity bill for the period 11 /2013 to 06/2015 the Power Factor was not taken in to account. The Audit wing after verification and calculation considering the Power Factor, found a difference of Rs.73,701/- in the bill of the complainant and accordingly the Opposite Parties issued the short assessment bill to the complainant.
The Opposite Parties further submit that when the electricity is supplied to a consumer, if the equipment or machine provided by him uses the full energy without waistage, the Power Factor will be between 6.9 to 1.00 and in such cases incentive of 0.25% on each 0.01 unit increase in Power Factor from 0.9 will be given. The Complainant uses time out and old machine and such machines could not use the full energy supplied and there by a lot of power would be wasted. In such cases disincentive of 1 % energy charge will be levied against the consumer by issuing short assessment bill. The complainant's machine are old and timed out causing waistage of energy and due to bonafide mistake, TOD was not considered while issuing the earlier bills during the period from 11/2013 to 06/2015. There is no illegality in issuing the bill for Rs.73701/- dated 4-4-2016. There is no service deficiency or unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties. There is no question of mental agony to be compensated .The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
The Complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and documents
Ext. A 1 is marked .PW1 was cross examined . Ext. A 1 is the short assessment bill dated - 4-04-2016 issued by the Opposite Parties.
The Opposite party adduced no evidence. Their counsel filed a detailed argument note during the hearing.
Based on the pleadings and evidence in this case the following issues are framed for consideration.
1. Whether there is any service deficiency on the part of any of the opposite party ?
2. If so, what is the relief?
For convenience, both these issues are considered together.
Here the specific case of the complainant is that he is a consumer of the Opposite Parties having electric connection bearing Consumer No.5751/L T IV- A for his Saw mill which is his sole source of income. He is paying the electricity bill regularly. The Opposite Parties issued a short assessment bill dated 4-4-2016 demanding payment of Rs.73701/- for a period from 11/2013 to 06/2015. It was also stated in the bill that the connection will be disconnected on 29-4-2016 ,if the amount is not paid before that . The complainant submits that the bill dated 4-4-2016 is illegal. The Opposite Parties issued monthly bills according to the power consumption., which is periodically inspected and calculated by the meter reader of Opposite Parties. The complainant promptly paid the entire bill amount including the bills for the period stated in bill dated 4-4-2016 without making default. Issuing an illegal bill and threatening the disconnection of power Supply is service deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties due to which the complainant suffered mental agony. Hence the complaint is filed for a direction to Opposite Parties to withdraw the bill dated 4-4-2016 and to pay compensation and costs.
As per the version of the Opposite Parties the complaint is false frivolous and not maintainable either in facts or in Iaw. The Opposite Parties admitted the electricity connection of the complainant's saw mill and issue of the short assessment bill for Rs. 73,701/- dated 4-4-2016. for the period from 11/2013 to 6/2015. The Opposite Parties submit that the bill under challenge is issued as per Section.134 of Kerala electricity supply code 2014 and in consonation with Kerala Gazette publication dated 14-08-2014 in O.P. No.9/2014 by which direction is issued to the Opposite Parties to take in to account the power factor and accordingly power factor incentive and disincentive has to be applied with a connected load at above 20 KW HT and EHT Consumer. The complainant is coming under the above said category and in such premises with a connected load of 20 KW and above, a TOD meter will be installed .That as per the audit report No. RAO / KSD/Gen. Audit/I Kumbla/2015-2016 of Regional Audit officer who verified the TOD (time of day) meter bill of complainant's connection found that while issuing electricity bill for the period 11 /2013 to 06/2015 the Power Factor was not taken in to account . The Audit wing after verification and calculation considering the Power Factor, found a difference of Rs.73,701/- in the bill of the complainant and accordingly the Opposite Parties issued the short assessment bill to the complainant.
The Opposite Parties further submit that when the electricity is supplied to a consumer, if the equipment or machine provided by him uses the full energy without waistage, the Power Factor will be between 6.9 to 1.00 and in such cases incentive of 0.25% on each 0.01 unit increase in Power Factor from 0.9 will be given. The Complainant uses time out and old machine and such machines could not use the full energy supplied and there by a lot of power would be wasted .In such cases disincentive of 1 % energy charge will be levied against the consumer by issuing short assessment bill. The complainant's machine are old and timed out causing waistage of energy and due to bonafide misstate, TOD was not considered while issuing the earlier bills during the period from 11/2013 to 06/2015. There is no illegality in issuing the bill for Rs.73,701/- dated 4-4-2016. There is no service deficiency or unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties. There is no question of mental agony to be compensated .The complaint is liable to be dismissed .
Here the main dispute is regarding the issue of short assessment bill dt.4.04.2016 issued to the complainant by the Opposite Parties, for Rs.73,701/-
The Opposite Parties has no case that the complainant made any default in paying any bill issued to him on the basis of meter reading . As per the version of the Opposite Parties, the Ext. A 1 bill was issued much later as per an Audit Report No. RAO / KSD/Gen. Audit/I Kumbla/2015-2016 of Regional Audit officer who verified the TOD (time of day) meter bill of complainant's connection. It is also stated that is as per Kerala Gazette publication dated 14-08-2014 in O.P. No.9/2014 which is issued as provided by Section.134 of Kerala electricity supply code 2014 . Necessary direction was issued to the Opposite Parties to take in to account the power factor and accordingly power factor incentive and disincentive has to be applied with a connected load at above 20 KW HT and EHT Consumer. The complainant is coming under the above said category and in such premises with a connected load of 20 KW and above, a TOD meter was installed . The counsel for the Opposite Parties would argue that the entire action of the KSEB is spirited by the national outlook that the energy cannot be allowed to be wasted and if wasted he has to be penalized. It is needless to state that the wastage of the energy , if any , is to be stopped by penalising such persons . But it can be done only in accordance with the existing law. The complainant argue that the short assessment bill is issued without any due process of law. The opposite party has not evolved any evidence assessment process for determining the power factor. Also the complainant has been denied opportunity to file any objection to the bill .It was determined without affording an opportunity for being heard .The opposite party arbitrarily issued a short assessment bill dated 4-4-2016 and threatened the complainant that the supply would be disconnected on 29-04-2016, if he failed to remit the amount before that. So there is violation of principle of natural justice.
The Opposite Party has furnished a copy of the Kerala Gazette publication dated 14-08-2014 in O.P. No.9/2014 as per their memo dated 3-4-2019. A simple reading of the above said Gazette Notification would show that the schedule of Tariff and terms and conditions for retail supply of electricity by KSEB Ltd. and all other licensees as per that notification is with effect from 16-08-2014. But in the Ext A1, the short assessment bill, it is seen that the amount is calculated for the period starting from 11/2013 onwards, for which the Opposite Parties are not entitled . It shows that there is negligence on the part of the Opposite Parties.
Therefore considering circumstances and available evidence and in the absence of any rebuttal evidence in this case , this commission is of the view that there is negligence on the part of the opposite parties and the Ext.A1 document , the short assessment bill dated 4-4-2016 issued by the opposite party is illegal and liable to be set aside. The opposite parties are at liberty to issue correct short assessment bill in consonance with the Kerala Gazette publication dated14-08-2014 in O.P. No.9/2014.
The Opposite Party is liable to compensate for the mental agony suffered by the complainant due to the issue of the Ext.A1 Short assessment bill. .The Complainant states that he had sustained a damage of Rs.50, 000/- But there is no reliable evidence to show the damage to the tune of such a huge amount. The commission is of the view that a total of Rs. 5,000/- will be a reasonable amount of compensation in this case.
ln the result, the complaint is allowed and the Ext.A1 document , the short assessment bill dated 4-4-2016 issued by the opposite parties is illegal and liable to be set aside. The Opposite Party directed to pay Rs.5, 000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.5, 000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) towards the costs to the Complainant. The opposite parties are at liberty to issue correct short assessment bill in consonance with the Kerala Gazette publication dated14-08-2014 in O.P. No.9/2014.
Time for compliance is 30 days from receipt of the copy of the Judgement.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1-Short Assessment bill 04/04/2016
Witness Examined
Pw1- Hassainar.K.M
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Senior Superintendent
Ps/
