KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL No.308/08 JUDGMENT DATED.3.10.09 PRESENT SHRI.M.V.VISWANATHAN -- JUDICIAL MEMBER SRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR -- MEMBER 1. The Asst.Engineer, Electrical Major Section, Marathakara, Thrissur. 2. The Kerala State Electricity Board -- APPELLANTS rep. by Secretary, Kerala State Electricity Board, Thiruvananthapuram. (By Adv.B.Sakthidharan Nair) Vs. 1. Mr.M.L.Davis, Mechery House, Peruvamkulangara, Ollur, Thrissur. 2. The Agricultural Officer, -- RESPONDENTS Krishi Bhavan, Ollur, Thrissur. (R1 By Adv.R.S.Kalkura) JUDGMENT SHRI.M.V.VISWANATHAN,JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated 24th April 2007 passed by CDRF, Thrissur in OP.644/04. The complaint in the said original petition was filed by the respondent herein as complainant against the appellants/opposite parties for getting the P2 penal bill dated 4.2.04 for Rs.81,000/- cancelled and also to get the disconnected electricity supply restored. The complainant alleged deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties 1 and 2 in issuing P2 penal bill and also in disconnecting the supply of electricity. The opposite parties 1 and 2 entered appearance and filed written version denying the alleged deficiency in service on their part. They contended that the complainant was provided with an agricultural 3 phase connection for running a 3 HP motor for agricultural purposes; but the complainant misused the electrical energy provided for that connection by connecting 2 other motors having 1 ½ HP and thereby misused the electrical energy provided for the complainant as Consumer No.96/Marathakkara. It is also contended that the supply of electricity was disconnected by invoking the provisions of regulation 44 of the conditions of supply of electrical energy and the P2 penal bill was issued by treating the electricity connection under LT-8. Thus, the opposite parties 1 and 2 prayed for dismissal of the complaint in OP.644/04. 2. The Forum below was of the view that the complainant being an agriculturist is entitled for free electricity under the Government order. At the instance of the Forum below the third opposite party/Agricultural Officer, Krishi Bhavan, Ollur, Thrissur was impleaded in the proceedings. It is to be noted that the complainant had no case in the complaint that he is entitled for exemption from payment of electricity under the Government order. There was no prayer in the complaint for getting exemption. The only grievance of the complainant was that the electricity supply to the Consumer No.96 of Electrical Major Section, Marathakkara was disconnected by the opposite parties 1 and 2 without any valid reason. It was further alleged that the opposite party/KSEB issued P2 penal bill without any basis. So, the impugned order passed by the Forum below directing the supplemental third opposite party to consider the right of the complainant for getting exemption and the further direction for considering the said issue by the opposite parties 1 and 2 are all un-necessary and un-warranted. The aforesaid findings and observations made in the impugned order are liable to be quashed. Hence we do so. 3. There is no dispute that the complainant is a consumer with Consumer No.96 of Electrical Major Section, Marathakkara and that he was provided with the electricity connection for running a 3 HP motor for agricultural purpose. The aforesaid electricity connection was a 3 phase connection. Admittedly, for the said electricity supply connection instead of installing a 3 phase energy meter, a single phase meter was installed at the premises of the complainant. It is the case of the opposite parties 1 and 2 that the complainant misused the aforesaid provision by misusing the electrical energy for running other 2 motors having 1 ½ HP each. The aforesaid conclusion was arrived at based on R1 site mahazar prepared by the anti power theft squad who inspected the premises. But, unfortunately the R1 site mahazar has not been proved by examining the person who prepared the mahazar. Nobody has been examined to prove the R1 site mahazar said to have been prepared by the anti power theft squad of the KSEB. It is pertinent to note that even an affidavit has not been filed in support of the R1 site mahazar. So, the case of the opposite party/KSEB that there was misuse of electrical energy by the complainant has not been proved. This is a fit case to be remitted back to the Forum below for affording sufficient opportunity to both parties to adduce evidence in support of their respective pleadings. The Forum below is also directed to pass an order on merits based on the pleadings and evidence on record. With the aforesaid observations the impugned order passed by the Forum below is set aside and the matter remanded back to the Forum below for fresh disposal of the same on merits. 4. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 24.4.07 passed by CDRF, Thrissur in OP.644/04 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Forum below for fresh disposal of the same on merits by strictly following the pleadings of the parties. The parties are directed to appear before the Forum below on 23.11.09. M.V.VISWANATHAN -- JUDICIAL MEMBER S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR -- MEMBER S/L
......................JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU | | 
