Kerala
StateCommission
735/2005
The Asst.Engineer - Complainant(s)
Versus
Rema Vijayan - Opp.Party(s)
B.Sakthidharan Nair
07 Dec 2009
ORDER
| First Appeal No. 735/2005 (Arisen out of order dated 30/06/2005 in Case No. First Appeal No. 279/2004 of District Kollam) | ||||||||||||||
1. The Asst.Engineer Electrical Major Section,Karunagappally North,Karunagappally,Kollam 2. The Secretary K.S.E.B,Vaidhyuthi Bhavan,Pattom Thiruvananthapuram Kerala ....Appellant 1. Rema Vijayan Pournami,Kayamkulam ....Respondent | ||||||||||||||
*JUDGEMENT/ORDER
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL NO.735/05 JUDGMENT DATED 7.12.09 PRESENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT 1. The Asst. Engineer, Electrical Major Section, Karunagappally North, Karunagappally, Kollam. 2.The Secretary, -- APPELLANTS KSEB, Vaidhythi Bhavan, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram. (By Adv.B.Sakthidharan Nair) Vs. Rema Vijayan, W/o late S.Vijayadas, -- RESPONDENT Pournami, Kayamkulam. JUDGMENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party in OP.279/04 in the file of CDRF, Kollam. The Forum has quashed the bill for Rs.46402/- issued by the appellant and directed the opposite party/appellant to issue fresh bill limiting the charges up to the expiry of the minimum guarantee agreement ie. 11/02. 2. It is the case of the complainant that the disconnection was effected in November 2001, but the bill has been issued subsequently on 28.1.04. The minimum guarantee period expired on 11/02. 3. The opposite parties had contended that the complainant is a consumer covered by the minimum guarantee agreement which will lapse only on 11/02. For non payment of electric charges the connection was disconnected in 11/01. But as per the minimum guarantee agreement, the consumer had agreed to pay the amount up to 11/02. The same would be Rs.27573/-. Dismantling was effected after 6 months of the minimum guarantee period. Hence the bill has been reduced to Rs.34926/-from Rs.46402/-. 4. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PW1, DW1 and Ext.P1. 5. The Forum has directed to limit the period of the bill to 11/02 the period of expiry of the minimum guarantee agreement. I find that there is no illegality in the order of the Forum as disconnection has been effected in 11/01. The opposite parties are bound to dismantle the connection after 6 months from the date of the disconnection. All the same, the complainant is bound to pay the amounts as per the minimum guarantee agreement for the period of the agreement that expires on 11/02. Hence, there is no justification for claiming the amount till the period of dismantling. From 11/02 the consumer was not having electric connection. I find that there is no merit in the appeal filed. Hence the appeal is dismissed. JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT Pronounced Dated the 07 December 2009
| ||||||||||||||
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
Bhanu Pratap
Featured
Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)
Bhanu Pratap
Featured RecomendedHighly recommended!
Experties
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Phone Number
7982270319
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.