KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM F.A. 555/09 JUDGMENT DATED:25.03.2010 PRESENT:- JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT SHRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER 1. The Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, KSEB, : APPELLANTS Kottakkal, Malappuram. 2. The Senior Superintendent, Electrical Section, KSEB, Kottakkal. (By Adv.Sri. S.Balachandran) Vs Kunhahammed, S/o.Alavikkutty, : RESPONDENT Chembode House, Mulanhipulakkal, Indianoor.P.O., Kottakkal, Malappuram – 676 503. JUDGMENT SHRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER This appeal prefers from this order passed by the CDRF, Malappuram in the file of C.C.No.129/08 dated 28.03.2009. The appellant is the opposite parties to prefer this appeal from the above impugned order passed by the Forum below. As per the complainant he is the consumer of the AC board and opposite parties issued a penal bill dated 09.03.06 and amount involving Rs.45,748/- towards this misuse of energy by the complainant. The complainant challenged the bill is illegally and against the provisions of law. Due to the non payment of this bill the opposite party later issued another disconnection cum demand notice for Rs.69,886/- including surcharges. The complainant prays for the Ext.A1 bill as well as cancellation of A4 arrear notice in continue of Ext.A1 bill. He alleged that the opposite party has not specifically stated or prove that Ext.A4 notice includes charges, other than any charges as per the Ext.A12 bill. The Forum below given notice to the opposite party and the opposite parties filed their written version without stating that they inspected the premises of the complainant and detected that the complainant was using the energy supplied for agricultural use only to a late-rite quarry for the purpose of washing the late-rite stone cutting machine. Hence the penal bill for Rs.45,748/- was issued under sec.126 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003. According to the opposite parties they proceed strictly accordance with the provisions of the Indian Electricity Act and the complainant who misused the connection taken under the agricultural purpose for commercial purpose. They prayed to dismissal of the complaint. For the evidence Exts.A1 to A9 were marked as documents by the complainant. There is no evidence adduced by the 1st opposite party. There is no oral evidence adduced by both parties. The Forum below stated a decision of the National Commission, Hariyana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Vs.Megh Raj and others. According to this decision, that is necessary to follow the entire procedure contemplated in Sec.126 before asking final assessment order. Non compliance of mandatory provisions is nothing but arbitrariness and against law by using the principal of the above decision. The Forum below was having above that Ext.A1 penal bill is issued not accordance with the law within it is legally and as to be set aside. The Forum below found that the opposite parties committed deficiency in service. In the result the complaint was allowed and ext.A1 bill dated 09.03.06 for Rs.45,748/- is cancelled. The Forum also ordered that the opposite party is jointly liable to refund to the amount in compensation towards ext.A1 bill. The complainant is at liberty to request to opposite parties to adjust the amount refund interfere electricity bill of any other electricity connection owned by him. No compensation for cost was awarded by the Forum below. This appeal prefers from the above impugned order passed by the Forum below. The counsel for the appellant argued on the grounds of the appeal memorandum that the Forum below passed the order without appreciating the legal provisions of the cancellation of the Exts.A1 and A4 bills. According to the counsel for the appellant the respondent/opposite parties are absolutely have the right to issue Ext.A1 and A4 bills. He further submit that the mahazar was prepared by the Officers of the opposite parties for the misuse of the electricity by the complainant. But it was not produced and marked by the opposite parties before the forum below the copy was produced by the Commission alone. As per this Mahazar it is seen that Meter No.2866844 is having a capacity 10-GOA/UNOV/1600 INP /ICWB at the recording of the mahazar is see as 0000. As per the mahazar it is seen that the authorized mahazar satisfied that not regarding energy meter was due to the defect of the meter. The mahazar was prepared by one T.M.Sivadasan, Sub Engineer, KSEB, Kottakkal and signed a witness Muhammed Shaffik. In the Mahazar it is clearly seen that the detection preparation of the Mahazar T.N.Sivadasan and this mahazar was not produced by the Forum below and marked as a document for the opposite parties. The counsel for the respondent/complainant argued that the case of the opposite parties is absolutely fabricated and there is no genuinity to prepare a mahazar like this and he submit that Ext.A1 and A4 documents are also issued not accordance with the provisions of the law and evidence. The counsel for the respondent/complainant submit that there is no details in the mahazar that the misuse of the electrical energy by the complainant and he is submitted that the order passed by the Forum below is strictly accordance with the law and evidence and it is legally sustainable. This commission heard in detail and perused the copy of the documents produced by the appellant and the copies of Exts.A1 and A4 and the mahazar is strictly speaking that the appellant opposite parties acted beyond the provisions of law they proceed illegally and irregularly. In other words there is no explanation from the part of the appellant for the non submission of the mahazar before the Forum below. It was suppressed with an illegal motive, there is no doubt that the Sub Engineer from the opposite parties abused his powers and he harassed the complainant. We are seeing that the order passed by the Forum below is strictly accordance with the law and evidence and it is illegally sustainable. We do not know why the superior officer of the Electricity board is protecting this type of subordinate officers. It is quite unfair. This is a true fact that the KSEB is functioning by the money of the public (consumers). Why this appellants are wasting public money for filing this type of appeals for the protection of irresponsible subordinate officers. It is contended that it is a fit case to award compensation for filing frivolous for vexatious complaints. The Forum below did not award such a compensation and cost. There is no reason to seeing for the interference in the order passed by the Forum below. It is legally sustainable and we uphold the decision of the Forum below. In the result, this appeal is dismissed and confirmed the order passed by the Forum below. Both parties are directed to suffer their respective cost. These points of appeal answered accordingly. M.K.ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT Kb. | 
