PBEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Dated this the 29th day of October 2011
Filed on : 21/10/2009
Present :
Shri. A Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member. Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member
C.C. No. 568/2009
Between
George Peter, : Complainant
Venpilil house, (By Adv. Tom Joseph, Court road,
Pandapilly P.O., Muvattupuzha)
Muvattupuzha.
And
1. M/s. Kerala State Electricity : Opposite parties
Board, Vydyuthy Bhavan, (By Adv. Ajay V Anand,
Pattom, PB. Asokan & George C
Thiruvananthapuram. Varghese, XL/4664, Banerji
Road, Ernakulam, Kochi-682 031.
2. The Assistant Engineer,
Electrical Section No. 1,
Muvattupuzha.
O R D E R
A Rajesh, President.
The case of the complainant is as follows:
The complainant is conducting an oil mill for earning his livelihood by means of self employment. He had taken electricity connection under LT-IV Tariff that is industrial category. Complainant recently purchased a second hand Photostat machine, a fax machine and a computer for conducting typewriting and Photostat business in the first floor of his building and temporally started it on 10-09-2009. While so, on 17-09-2009 the APTS, Kannur unit conducted an inspection at complainant’s premises and on the basis of their report, the 2nd opposite party issued a penal bill for Rs. 1,09,500/- alleging unauthorized extension of 3KW for 365 days. He had also issued a bill for Rs. 9,000/- towards excess fixed charge. The complainant is not liable to pay the above said bill amounts since the Photostat and typewriting business was started by him only on 10-09-2009. There was no unauthorized extension prior to 10-09-2009. So the issuing of penal bill for Rs. 1,09,500/- alleging unauthorized extension of 3KW for 365 days is not sustainable and amounts to deficiency of service. Thus the complainant preferred this complaint to get the disputed bills set aside.
2. The Version of the opposite parties
The complainant is the consumer of the 1st opposite party from 12-12-1985 with consumer No. 16653 under the industrial tariff. The complainant is conducting an oil mill on the ground floor of the building. The connected load of the complainant is 12 KW. The complainant is conducting a Photostat and computer typewriting business on the 1st floor of the building. An unauthorized extension of 3 kw was found to be taken from existing meter to the 1st floor of the building and a bill for Rs. 1,09,500/- has been served on the complainant. The inspection was conducted by the APTS Kannur unit along with the officials of electrical section No. 1, Muvattupuzha on 16-09-2009. On inspection ;it was found that the complainant used an unauthorized extension of power of 3 KW for commercial purpose to the 1st floor of the building by drawing a cable from xisting meter and extended power was used for conducting Photostat and computer typewriting business. A site mahasar was prepared and penal bill for Rs. 1,09,500/- was served for the unauthorized additional 3 KW load to the complainant under section 126 of the Indian Electricity Act 2003. The bill was prepared and issued as per the rules prevailing in the Indian Electricity Act. 2003 and KSEBoard Terms and conditions of Supply 2005. The complainant enhanced the connected load without getting any proper sanction from the board. The complaint is without any bonafides and merits.
3. The complainant was examined as PW1, Exts. A1 to A3 were marked on his side. The 2nd opposite party was examined as DW1, Exts. B1 and B2 were marked on the side of the opposite parties. Heard the counsel for the parties.
4. The only point that comes up for consideration is whether the complainant is liable to pay the amount as per the impugned bill. During the proceedings in this Forum at the instance of the complainant vide order in I.A. No. 503/2009 the opposite parties were directed to refrain from disconnecting the electric supply to ;the complainant provided the complainant remits Rs. 10,000/- with the 2nd opposite party. The said order has not been challenged by the opposite parties.
5. Admittedly on 16-09-2009 the Anti Power Theft Squad of the opposite party inspected the premises of the opposite party and found an unauthorized extension of Power of 3 KW for commercial purpose to the 1st floor of the building, evidenced by Ext. B1 mahazar. On the basis of Ext. B1 mahazar the opposite party, issued Ext. A1 and A3 penal bills dated 23-09-2009 to the tune of Rs. 1,09,500/- and Rs. 4,691/- respectively to the complainant under section 126 of Electricity Act 2003. The counsel for the complainant contended that the opposite party has retrospectively calculated the penal charges for one year from the date of inspection and the same is unsustainable in law, since the complainant has purchased the Photostat machine only on 08-09-2009 as per Ext. A2. Evidently the opposite party has not considered the contentions of the complainant while issuing Ext. A1 and A3 disputed bills. Section 126(5) of Electricity Act 2003 readings as follows:
If the assessing officer reaches to the conclusion that unauthorized use of electricity has taken place, the assessment shall be made for the entire period during which such unauthorized use of electricity has taken place cannot be ascertained, such period shall be limited to a period of twelve months immediately preceding the date of inspection”
6. In this case since the complainant is evidently purchased the machine as evidenced by Ext. A2 and started functioning only on 10-09-2009. The findings of the opposite party that he had been using the electricity supply since one year is not sustainable for no reasons proven other wise.
7. Accordingly we partly allow this complaint and order as follows:
i. The order in I.A. No. 503/2009 is made absolute.
ii. We set aside Ext. A1 and A3 penal bills
iii. The 2nd opposite party shall issue a fresh bill for a period from 08-09-2009 the date of purchase of photo stat machine till the date of inspection on 16-09-2009.
iv. The complainant shall take steps to apply for a fresh connection for his new venture at the 1st floor of the premises. The application filed by the complainant shall be considered by 2nd opposite party Immediately without further drawing the petitioner to unnecessary litigation. In case no such application is made the authorities are free to go forward.
The above said order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 29th day of October 2011
