KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUDTHIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL NO.875/06 JUDGMENT DATED.30.9.06 PRESENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT SMT.VALASALA SARANGADHARAN -- MEMBER SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA -- MEMBER 1. Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, Kadakkal, Kollam, 2. Secretary, -- APPELLANTS KSEB.,Vaidyuthi Bhavan, Pattom, Trivandrum. (By Adv.S.Balachandran) Vs. Prasana Kumar, Meena Vihar, Venkolla P.O, -- RESPONDENT Madathara, Kollam. (By Adv.Dinesh Sajan.K) JUDGMENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/KSEB in OP.330/04 in the file of CDRF, Kollam. The bill issued by the opposite parties for a sum of Rs.2533/- stands cancelled. The appellants are also directed to re-instate the electric supply and also to install a fault free electronic meter. A compensation of Rs.500/- and cost of Rs.500/- are also ordered to be paid. 2. The case of the complainant is that the energy meter in his shop room was replaced by static meter on 26.1.04. There was no defect to the meter. The subsequent bill is for a sum of Rs.2,533/- on the basis of the consumption recorded as 413 units. The complainant was also issued the direction to repair the wiring, as there was earth leakage. In fact, there was no such earth leakage. On 3.4.2004 the supply was disconnected. It is sought for installing a fault free static meter and for reconnecting the electric supply. 3. The opposite parties/appellants have contended that the meter was faulty and hence the same was replaced on 26.1.04. with an electronic meter. Subsequently, a spot bill was issued for 413 units. On the basis of the complaint by the consumer the premises were inspected on 17.3.04. It was found that the meter was working properly. But there was leakage of electricity. The complainant was convinced about the leakage. The complainant was directed as per notice issued to rectify the leakage in the system within 15 days. When the complainant declined to rectify the defects the supply was disconnected on 3.4.2004. The complainant also refused to open the shop room when attempt was made to check the meter by installing a parallel meter. 4. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of DW1, D1 to D4 and Exts.P1 to P5. 5.The Forum has found that there is no proper evidence to show that the earlier meter was defective. According to the complainant he was only remitting a sum of Rs.192/- bi-monthly. It is pointed out by the counsel for the appellant that in Ext. D1, the complaint filed in the matter earlier which was withdrawn, and fresh complaint filed it is specifically admitted that the earlier meter was defective. The finding of the Forum that there is no test report as to the earlier meter indicating that it is defective, is erroneous, it is contended. The Forum has directed to the opposite parties as mentioned above only on the basis that there is no objective evidence as to the case that the old meter was defective. 6. We find that the Forum has not considered the case of the opposite parties that there was earth leakage. The case of the complainant is that the old meter had not faults is contrary to his statement in Exts.P4 admitting that there was defect to the former meter. There is no specific case that the present electronic meter installed is defective. The case of the opposite parties that the attempt to check the correctness of the electronic meter was resisted was also not denied. No independent evidence has been adduced to show that there is no earth leakage. In the circumstances, the order of the Forum cancelling Ext.P4 bill is set aside. The complainant would rectify earth leakage and intimate the opposite party. The direction to pay compensation and costs is set aside. The appeal is allowed as above. JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT VALASALA SARANGADHARAN -- MEMBER M.K.ABDULLA SONA -- MEMBER
......................JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU | | 
