IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Friday the 31st day of December, 2010
Filed on 23.12.2008
Present
- Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
- Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
- Smt. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.315/2008
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri. P.D.Mohandas 1. The Secretary, KSEB Asheervad Asheervad (Puthanpurackal) Vaidhyuthi Bhavanam
P.O. Punnapra, Ward No. 8 Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram
Alappuzha – 688 004
2. The Executive Engineer
KSEB., Electrical Major Section
Ambalappuzha, Alappuzha
3. The Assistant Engineer
Electrical Section, KSEB
Punnapra, Alappuzha
O R D E R
SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER)
Sri. P.D. Mohandas has filed this complaint, before the Forum on 23.12.2008 against the opposite parties alleging deficiency in service. The brief facts of the allegations are as follows:- He is a consumer of the opposite parties vide Consumer No.15585 and he was remitting the payment of electricity charges without default even though nobody was residing in his residential building for a long period. The electricity meter installed in his residence was defective from 2005 January onwards. A new meter was installed only on 28.11.2007 and the opposite parties take nearly 3 years to install a new meter. He remitted the bill amount during the period, when the meter was defective, without any default and he paid the amount based on the consump0tion of below150 units, bimonthly regularly. But he had received an additional bill of opposite parties vide dt. 16.10.2008 for Rs.2934/- and the said bill was for the back assessment during the period when the meter was defective. He filed objection to the said bill amount to the opposite parties on 31.10.2008. But the opposite parties directed him to remit the said amount. Further opposite parties issued a bill for Rs.749/- vide dt. 29.11.2008. He intimated the willingness to remit the said amount of Rs.749/- . But the opposite parties insisted to remit the amount along with the disputed amount of Rs.2934/-. He has not obtained any positive relief from the opposite parties regarding the above disputed matter. Hence this complaint.
2. Notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties entered appearance before the Forum and filed version by the 3rd opposite party, for and on behalf of the other opposite parties.
3. It is stated that the complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties with Consumer No.15585 and service connection was effected on 16.11.2005 for domestic purpose with a connected load of 3355 watts; and the dispute is faulty meter before January 2005 is false. The average consumption was 150 units/bimonthly and was continued up to 11/2007. The faulty meter changed on 28.11.2007. After the installation of new meter, the average consumption recorded during first week was 215 units/bimonthly. From 28.11.2007 to 25.1.2008 the consumption was 200 units. It is stated that invoice issued on 16.10.2008 for Rs.2934/- is based on the actual consumption, and they have taken necessary corrections in the assessment period of the bill and revised the bill for Rs.1795/- and that there is no deficiency in service on their part.
3. Considering the contentions of the parties, this Forum has raised the following issued for consideration:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to remit the disputed amount?
3) Compensation and costs.
4. Issues 1 to 3:- Complainant has filed proof affidavit in support of his case and produced documents in evidence – Exts.A1 to A4 – marked – and he has been examined as PW1. Ext.A1 is the bill for Rs.2934/- issued by the opposite parties to the complainant stating that it is for the back assessment bill for the faulty period. Ext.A2 is the letter dt. 31.10/2008 addressed to the 3rd opposite party by the complainant disputing the additional bill. Ext.A3 is the reply letter dt. 20.11.2008 to the complainant directing to remit the amount of Rs.2934/-. Ext.A4 is the letter to the 3rd opposite party vide dt. 17.12.2008 by the complainant about the disputed amount.
5. 3rd opposite party has filed proof affidavit and produce documents in evidence – Ext.B1 series – 5 Nos. and he has been examined as RW1. Ext.B1 series are the bills issued by the 3rd opposite party to the complainant on different dates with amounts.
6. We have examined the entire matter of this case and perused the documents given by both sides in evidence, and heard the matter in detail. The dispute is relating to the issue of an additional bill by the opposite parties for an amount of Rs.2934/-. It is alleged that the opposite parties have unilaterally imposed the amount to the complainant. The meter of the complainant was faulty one from 1/05 to 11/07. New meter was installed on 28.1.2007, and opposite parties issued the bill for an additional amount of Rs.2934/-, there is inordinate delay in replacing the meter and opposite party has issued the bill for exorbitant amount without taking into the actual consumption of electricity. The complainant has remitted the amount properly on the basis of the bills issued by the opposite parties. The opposite parties have no locus standi to issue the bill on the basis of back assessment and without any basis. The contentions raised by the opposite parties regarding the assessment and issuance of the disputed bills have no bona fides and the contentions of the opposite parties cannot be sustained. Considering the whole facts and circumstances of this case, and after verification of the entire documents, we are of the view that the opposite parties are not entitled to get the amount for additional amount of Rs.2934/-, since the assessment of the said amount are without any basis and prepared the same without verifying the actual consumption. So the complainant is not entitled to remit the said amount of Rs.2934/-, since the amount assessed by the opposite parties was illegal and arbitrary. So the additional bill for Rs.2934/- is hereby quashed and direct the opposite parties to allow the complainant to remit the amount of Rs.748/- for the month of 11/2008 and restrained the opposite parties from disconnecting the electric supply to the complainant on the basis of the additional bill amount.
Considering the whole facts of this matter, we are not directing the opposite parties to pay any compensation or costs to the complainant. Complaint is allowed accordingly.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of December, 2010.
Sd/- Sri.K. Anidudhan:
Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah:
Sd/-Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext. A1 - Bill for Rs.2934/-
Ext.A2 - Letter dt. 31.10.2008
Ext.A3 - Reply letter dt. 20.11.2008
Ext.A4 - Letter to the 3rd opposite party dt. 17.12.2008
Evidence of the opposite parties:-
RW1 - V.S.Jayasankar (Witness)
Ext.B1 series - Bills issued by the 3rd opposite party to the
Complainant
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.
Typed by:-pr/-
Compared by:-
