Date of Filing : 16-12-2008 Date of Order : 15-06-2009 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD C.C.No.292/08 Dated this, the 15th day of June 2008. PRESENT SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER SMT.P.P.SHYMALADEVI : MEMBER Ahamed Kutty, S/o.Aboobacker, } Complainant R/at.Backer Cottage, Pulikoor, Po.Shiribagilu, Kasaragod.Dt. (Adv.K.P.Narayanan Nair, Kasaragod) 1. The Kerala State Electricity Board } Opposite parties Rep. by its Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The Executive Engineer, Electrical Major Section, Nellikkunnu. 3. Senior Superintendent, Electrical Major Section, Nellikkunnu. (Adv.P.Raghavan, Kasaragod) O R D E R SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT Complainant received a demand notice for Rs.2520/- from opposite party No.3. It is alleged to be for the excess consumption during the period 7/06 to 7/07 in which the meter was not working. 2. The complainant submitted that the amount as per the bill is already remitted fearing disconnection of electricity. Hence he praying for the refund of the amount with compensation. 3. According to opposite parties 1 to 3 the meter kept in the premises of the complainant during 7/06 to 7/07 was faulty and the same was changed on 13-09-2007. They were collecting the current charges for 180 units bi-monthly during the period in which the meter was faulty. After changing the faulty meter the actual bi-monthly consumption is more than 300 units. Therefore they take the average consumption after changing the meter as 319 units and the back assessment has been made. The average consumption during the meter faulty period was 180 units and after changing the meter it is 319 units bi-monthly. Therefore the bill for unassessed consumption of the electricity for 6 months before the changing the faulty meter is issued. The opposite party can issue such short assessment bills. Hence there is no deficiency in service. 4. Complainant produced the demand notice dated 26-11-2008 for Rs.2520/-. It is marked as Ext.A1. The copies of the demand notices issued to the complainant during the period 20-07-06 to 22-01-09 is produced and marked as Ext.B1 series. The consumer meter reading report is marked as Ext.B2. Both sides heard. 5. The only point to be considered in this complaint is whether the opposite parties are justified in making the demand for the alleged excess consumption during the period in which the meter was faulty or not. 6. The demand is unsustainable and opposite parties are not entitled to collect the said amount. Further there is no provisions either in the KSEB Terms & Conditions of Supply 2005 or in the Electricity Act 2003 to raise such a demand. 7. Sec.55 of the Electricity Act 2003 says that No licensee shall supply electricity, after expiry of two years from the appointed date, except through installation of a Correct meter in accordance with the regulations made in that behalf. 8. So as per this Section the KSEB should have fixed a correct meter immediately on noting the defects. Here the supply of electricity to the complainant was through a faulty meter and there after claimed additional charges taking the succeeding meter readings after replacing the faulty meter. That is not legally permissible because it was the duty of the opposite party to maintain a good running meter and replace a faulty meter immediately on noting the defects. 9. Secondly Sec.42 (3) of the KSEB Terms & Conditions of Supply 2005 nowhere permits the Opposite parties to make an additional demand after taking the average consumption of either proceeding or succeeding 6 months after the replacement of the faulty meter. 10. Regulation 42 (3) reads as follows. “The consumer may report any complaint regarding meter to the concerned Electrification Section. The inspection of the meter will be carried out using the standard reference meter (Single Phase/Three Phase) available in the Section office which is tested, calibrated and sealed by the Electrical Inspectorate. If meter is found faulty such meters shall be replaced immediately at the expense of the Board. If the existing meter after having found faulty is replaced with a new one, the consumption recorded during the period in which the meter was faulty shall be reassessed based on the average consumption for the previous six months prior to replacement of meter. If the average consumption for the previous six months cannot be taken due to the meter ceasing to record the consumption or any other reason, the consumption will be determined based on the meter reading in the succeeding six months after replacement of meter and excess claimed if any, shall be adjusted in the future current charge bills.” 11. This regulation only permits the KSE Board to adjust the excess amount claimed (collected) from the consumer in the future current charge bills if the amount collected during the period in which the meter was faulty was more than the actual dues based on the average consumption of succeeding months or preceding months after the replacement of meter. It nowhere says that the excess consumed/or unassessed if any shall be billed additionally if the consumption after the replacement of the meter is higher than that of the average consumption calculated or assumed during the period in which the meter was faulty. Hence the opposite parties are not entitled for the amount collected from the complainant as per Ext.A1 and they are liable to refund it. Therefore the complaint is allowed and the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs.2520/- collected from the complainant with interest @ 15% per annum from the date of complaint with a cost of Rs.2000/-. Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Extsa. A1.Demand notice. B1. Series Bills. B2.Consumer Meter Reading Report. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Pj/ Forwarded by Order SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
......................K.T.Sidhiq
......................P.P.Shymaladevi
......................P.Ramadevi | | 
