Kerala

Palakkad

CC/73/2011

Abdhul Kalam - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary - Opp.Party(s)

29 Feb 2012

ORDER

 
CC NO. 73 Of 2011
 
1. Abdhul Kalam
S/o.Muhamma Haneefa, MEM Manzil, Kambrath Challa, Muthalamada (PO), Palakkad - 678 507.(Secretary, Kambrath Challa, Ahlu, Sunnath Val Jama ath (hanafi) Palli Committe)
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Secretary
Kerala State Electricity Board, Vaidhyuthi Bhavan, Thiruvananthpauram
Thiruvananthapuram
Kerala
2. Asst.Engineer
Electrical Section, K.S.E.B., Muthalamada, Palakkad - 678 507
Palakkad
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONARABLE MRS. Seena.H PRESIDENT
 HONARABLE MRS. Preetha.G.Nair Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM  PALAKKAD

 

Dated this the 29th  Day  of February  2012

 

Present    : Smt.Seena H, President

               : Smt. Preetha.G. Nair, Member       

                                                                   Date of filing: 19/05/2011    

 

 

                             (C.C.No.73/2011)

Abdul Kalam,

S/o.Muhammed Haneefa,

MEM Manzil,

Kambrathchalla,

Muthalamada (PO),

Palakkad – 678 507

(Secretary,

Kambrathchalla Ahlu,

Sunnath val jamath (Hanafi)

Palli Committee)                                  -        Complainant

(By Adv.T.V.Praveenkumar)

                                                                     V/s

1.Secretary,

   Kerala State Electricity Board,

   Vaidyuthi Bhavan, Trivandrum,   

   (By Adv.L.Namasivayam)

 

2.Asst.Engineer,

    Electrical Section,

    Kerala State Electricity  Board,

    Muthalamada,

    Palakkad District – 678 507                         -        Opposite parties    

(By Adv.L.Namasivayam)

 

  O R D E R

 

         

          By  Smt.PREETHA G NAIR  MEMBER

 

Complaint in brief:

 

Complainant is the Secretary of Mosque Committee. The dispute is with respect to illegal disconnection of the electricity supply provided to mosque. Complainant is the consumer of opposite parties vide consumer  No.1770 LT VI. The grievance of the complainant is that without any prior notice opposite parties has dismantled the electricity connection provided to the mosque on 10/12/10. Though complainant was requested for reconnection   vide letter dated 2/2/11 and 23/3/11, opposite parties has not provided the connection. Hence application filed for restoration of electricity connection and for compensation on account of deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.

Opposite parties filed version contending inter alia that complainant is not a consumer since connection was provided in the name of the then President of the mosque committee. According to opposite parties the last payment of electricity bill by the complainant is on 21/1/10. After disconnection, final reminder notice before RR action was given on 8/9/2010 and the connection was dismantled on 24/11/10. According to opposite parties, they acted as per rules only.  Reconnection cannot be provided as it was dismantled. Further complainant has not suffered any loss on account of  any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.  

Parties filed evidence in the form of chief affidavit. Ext.A1 to A.13 marked on the side of the complainant and Ext.B1 to B.2 marked on the side of the opposite parties.

During the pendency of the proceeding before the Forum, a claim petition was filed by a 3rd party disputing  the ownership of the mosque. Since opposite party has admitted that consumer No.1770 was allotted to Jamaith Mosque Committee represented by the complainant. Hence IA 446/11 was dismissed. IA 192/11 filed for reconnection of the electricity connection was allowed as there was no dues to opposite party payable by the complainant. Reconnection charges as per law was ordered  to be paid by the complainant.

Issues for consideration are

 

  1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties ?
  2. If so, what is the cost and relief entitled to the complainant ?

Issues No.1 & 2

 

Admittedly complainant is the consumer of opposite parties vide consumer No.1770 LT VI. Opposite parties stated that since it is a wakf property, Wakf Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide the dispute.  Dispute with respect to the  ownership of said property is also pending before the Wakf Tribunal. Opposite parties have no case that any amount is due to them. The main contention of opposite party is that the complainant is not a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act. Since the connection is provided to the mosque  and the present Secretary of the mosque committee has filed the complaint.  Hence complainant is a consumer. Further dispute with respect to the ownership in another Tribunal  does not  bar the complainant from seeking remedy under C.P.Act  for restoration of  electricity connection.

 

Section 25 (4) of the Kerala Electricity   Supply code 2005  states that if the service connection stands disconnected for more than 6  months,  the licensee shall arrange dismantling the same on  15 days notice and no charge shall be due to the licensee for the period, which is in excess of six months from the date of disconnection.

Ext.B2 is the copy of disconnection notice issued  by the 2nd opposite party. Ext.B1 is the attested copy of dismantle register.   The opposite parties stated that the electricity  connection was dismantled on 24/11/2010. Ext.A6 series documents are the copies  of receipts obtained for  remittance of electricity charges. Ext.A1 is the copy of the general body convened on 15/2/11.

 

The evidence produced on the side of complainant will prove that they are  in actual possession of the mosque and paying electricity charges. In the present case the dispute is regarding the reconnection of electricity. Normally in mosque day and night prayers are conducted. Water and Electricity was essential  to the devotees. Ext.A13 shows the receipt to take generator on  Nabidinam for an amount of Rs.9100/.

 

The supply of electricity  is essential to mosque. Festival days and normal days the devotees went to the mosque for prayer. The act of opposite parties to disconnection of electricity done as per the conditions of electricity Act.  The complainant has not produced evidence to show that he remitted the fee for reconnection before filing the complaint. Moreover opposite parties stated that reconnection cannot be provided as it was dismantled. We find that   reconnection of electricity connection of the complainant will meet the ends of justice.

 

In view of the above stated facts and circumstances of the case we partly allowed the complaint. The order in I.A.192/11 made absolute.   No compensation and cost  awarded.

 

Pronounced in the open court on this the 29th day of February 2012. 

 

                                                                                  Sd/-

Seena.H

President

   Sd/-

Preetha G Nair

Member

 

APPENDIX

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant

1.Ext. A1   Meeting decision of Palli Committee dated 15/5/2011 (attested true copy)

2. Ext. A2 –  Attested copy of agreement  regarding  managing the  Dikirkhana mosque

3. Ext. A3 –  True copy of sanctioning payment of arrears in 4 instalments by AE, KSEB,

                    Kollengode

4.Ext.A4 – True copy of request letter sent by Secretary, Kabrathchalla Juma ath Palli

                  Committee regarding paying arrears in installments

5.Ext.A5 – True copy of order regarding payment of arrears in installments by KSEB

6.Ext.A6 series –  photocopy of  Receipts on payments of arrears (3 nos)

7.Ext.A7 – True copy of request letter for repairing the faulty meter by Palli secretary

8.Ext.A8 – True copy of Order in OS 593/01 by Hon’ble  Munsiff Court, Chittur

9.Ext.A9 – True copy of request letter sent by Secretary, Palli Committee regarding

                 installing the dismantle connection

10.  Ext.A10 – Postal acknowledgment card signed by 2nd opposite party

11.Ext.A11 – Copy of letter addressed to Executive Engineer, KSEB, Chittur regarding    

                    reconnection.

12. Ext.A12 – Receipts issued by opposite party while reconnecting the  electricity connection.

13. Ext.A13 – Receipt for Rs.9,100/- for rent of generator used for  Nabidinam celebrations.

 

Exhibits marked on the side of the Opposite Party

1.Ext. B1 –  Attested copy of dismantle register of consumer No.1770

2.Ext. B2 – Attested copy  of final reminder before RR action.

 

Cost Allowed

No cost allowed

 

 
 
[HONARABLE MRS. Seena.H]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONARABLE MRS. Preetha.G.Nair]
Member

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 Recomended
Highly 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.