Date of filing : 30-04-2008<br /> Date of Order : 13-08-2008<br /> IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD<br /> CC.54/08<br /> Dated this, the 13th day of August 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT<br /> SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER<br /> SMT.P.P.SHYMALADEVI : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> T. Krishnan Advocate,<br /> S/o.Cheriyakkan, Swayamvara, } Complainant<br /> Near Vallippalam, Ajanur.Po,<br /> Kizhakkumkara.<br /> <br /> 1. Regional Audit Officer, Electrical Circle, } Opposite parties<br /> K.S.E.B, Kanhangad.<br /> 2. Assistant Executive Engineer, <br /> Electrcial Sub-Division, K.S.E.B, Mavungal.<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ,PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> In nutshell the grievance of the complainant Adv.Krishnan is against the electricity bill dtd.26-04-08 for Rs.3985/- in his home. According to him the bill is no way tally with the actual usage. Complainant also disputes the correctness of meter.<br /> 2. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub-Division, K.S.E.B, Mavungal the 2nd Opposite party herein filed his version. The Regional Audit Officer neither appeared nor filed version.<br /> 3. According to Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub-Divisional, K.S.E.B, Mavungal the bill issued for Rs.3985/- dtd.26-04-2008 is legal and is based on the meter reading and the consumer is liable to pay the said bill. The meter is in good running condition and against the dispute regarding bill he should have preferred appeal before the assessing officer and appellate authority U/s 126 of Electricity Act 2003. Hence Forum lacks jurisdiction and there is no deficiency in service on their part.<br /> 4. Adv.Krishnan filed affidavit in support of his case Exts A1 to A7 were marked. Exts A5 is the copy of the disputed bill dated 26-04-2008 for Rs.3985/-. The consumption shown in the said bill is 954 units.<br /> 5. The Assistant Executive Engineer, K.S.E.B, Mavungal, Kanhangad has filed affidavit reiterating what is stated in his version Ext. B1 is marked on his side.<br /> 6. Ext. B1 is the extract of Meter reading register pertaining to the complainant’s consumer number.<br /> 7. The meter reading from 19-08-2004 to 23-06-2008 is added in Ext.B1. The consumption pattern shows that the bi-monthly consumption is two hundred and odd units from 25-2-05 to 21-12 –07. The reading on 26-2-08 is 332 units and that of 24-04-08 is 954 units. The subsequent reading dated 23-06-08 is 179 units.<br /> 8. The complainant affirms that there are only two members permenantly residing in his family and there were no occasion in his house which attracts huge consumption. He also submits that no A/C is fitted. As against the bill he preferred complaint before Opposite party No.2 and an employee who visited the premises on 27-4-08 just have a glance at the electricity meter and certified it is correct.<br /> 9. According to Opposite party No.2 the working of meter is proper and there is no complaint regarding the accuracy of meter.<br /> 10. The contention of opposite party No.2 that the only remedy available to consumer against the assessment in appeal U/s 127 Electricity Act and the Forum lacks jurisdiction is not acceptable. Sec.3 of the Consumer Protection Act provides an additional remedy which is not in derogation of any other laws. The Electricity Act Sec.173 also prescribes that nothing contained in the Electricity Act or any rule or regulation made under or any instrument having effect by virtue of the Act, rule or regulation shall have effect in so far as it is inconsistent with any other provisions of Consumer Protection Act 1986. Therefore it is clear that the jurisdiction of Consumer Forum cannot be exhausted in view of Sec.3 of Consumer Protection Act.<br /> 11. On merits, complainant challenges the accuracy of the meter whereas opposite party No.2 submits that the meter is a good running one. So there is a dispute regarding the correctness of the working of meter. When there is dispute regarding the accuracy of meter Reg.42 of the K.S.E.B Terms and Conditions of Supply 2005 will comes is to play as per which the meter shall be specially tested by Board or Electrical Inspector to Government.<br /> 12. So we think this is a fit case to be referred to Electrical Inspector and the Electrical Inspector has to decide the amount of energy supplied to the Consumer during the disputed period in view of Reg.42(2) of Terms and Conditions of Supply.<br /> Therefore we direct the Assistant Executive Engineer, K.S.E.B, Mavungal, Kanhangad to take steps to refer the meter kept in the premises of complainant to Electrical Inspector. The complainant shall remit the fee for testing the meter with opposite party No.2 on demand. The bill dated 26-4-08 for Rs.3985/- is hereby cancelled and opposite party No.2 is at liberty to issue revised bill in accordance with the report of Electrical Inspector. In the circumstances there is no order as to costs. Time for compliance 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.<br /> <br /> Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-<br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> Exts.<br /> A1.21-12-07 Bill <br /> A2. 27-12-07 receipt<br /> A3. Photo copy of consumer card<br /> A4. 26-4-08 complaint sent by complainant to OP<br /> A5.24-04-2008 Bill<br /> A6.23-06-2008 copy of bill<br /> A7.29-10-07 receipt<br /> <br /> B1. Consumer Meter Reading Report.<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-<br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> Pj/ Forwarded by Order<br /> <br /> <br /> SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT<br /> <br />