IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA Dated this the 18th day of January, 2011. Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member) Sri. N. Premkumar (Member) C.C.No. 5/10 (Filed on 05.01.2010) Between: G.N. Ravindra Panicker, 67 years, Gopalapurathu House, Thekkuthodu.P.O., (Via) Konni, Pathanamthitta Dist, Pin – 689 699 (By Adv. R. Gopikrishnan) ..... Complainant. And: 1. The Secretary, KSEB, Vaidyuthi Bhavan, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. Asst. Exe. Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, KSEB, Pathanamthitta. 3. Asst.Engineer, KSEB, Electrical Section, Konni. ..... Opposite parties. O R D E R Sri. N. Premkumar (Member): Complainant filed this complaint for getting a relief from the Forum. 2. Fact of the case in brief is as follows: Complainant is the consumer of opposite parties. The electrical energy meter of his house premises was completely non-functional from 16.10.04 to 22.4.05. But that time also the opposite parties collected the meter rent from the complainant in the tune of ` 20 each by totaling ` 60 illegally. For that complainant filed a complaint against opposite parties earlier and the same was numbered as O.P.No.107/05. The said O.P was allowed by this Forum and directed the opposite parties to return ` 60 with 12% interest per annum and also allowed to realise ` 1,000 as compensation from the opposite parties. The opposite parties had not complied the order within time hence the complainant filed E.P.23/08 and realised the ordered amount of ` 1,069. The said amount was received by the complainant on 13.11.08 from this Forum on an undertaking that if the appeal No.859/06 filed by opposite parties against the said order was allowed by the Hon’ble C.D.R.C, the complainant is bound to return the above said amount to this Forum or as directed by the Forum. 3. On 30.6.09 the said appeal No.859/06 was allowed by the Hon’ble CDRC against which the complainant preferred the appeal before the Hon’ble National Commission and the same included in the registry. After the appeal decision by the Hon’ble CDRC and its conveyance the complainant returned the amount of ` 1,069 to this Forum in cash on 20.11.09 on the basis of the previous undertaking and the matter was properly intimated to the 3rd opposite party. 4. But opposite parties insisted the complainant to remit the amount with interest as decided by them to the office of the 3rd opposite party directly on that occasion the complainant expressed his helplessness for making the payment directly to the office on the reason of undertaking made on 13.11.08 before this Forum as well as the payment was effected to the Forum on 20.11.09. But all the pleas of the complainant put in deaf ears. After the above said incidents the opposite parties were enimical terms with the complainant. On 16.12.09 the 3rd opposite party issue a notice directing the complainant to pay ` 1,778 within 7 days from the date of the notice. This time also the complainant narrated all these matters to the concerned officer. 5. On 29.12.09 at about 4 p.m. the 3rd opposite party disconnected to complainant’s electric supply to his residence. This is quite against the natural justice and existing principles of the law. The opposite parties such act amount to unfair practice and deficiency in service. The opposite parties illegal disconnection of service caused much mental agony and suffering to the complainant and his family. 6. The complainant is a retired military person who took part in the war between India and Pakistan in 1965 and 1971. He is one among them who has been honoured for their actual participations in 1971 was in Bangladesh and was awarded ‘Eastern Star’ which was approved by the then Hon’ble President of India. Moreover the complainant is a chronic cardiac patient. The complainant’s wife is also suffering from many of the ailments whose age is 64 years. 7. After the disconnection the complainant directly contacted the 3rd opposite party and the Executive Engineer of Pathanamthitta Division with the request to reinstate the service connection. But the opposite partied did not heed the request of the complainant and the service connection was not restored at the time this complaint. The complainant and his family were availing drinking water from their well located at a downward area of about 75 metres from the residence. Since the electric connection is disconnected the pumping of water from the well is completely stopped and there by the opposite party has prevented the facility of drinking water to him and the family. Hence this complaint for restoring the electric connection with compensation and cost. 8. Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version stating that complainant’s energy meter was faulty during the period from 16.10.04 until its replacement on 22.4.05 with a good energy meter. The complainant approached this Forum by filing O.P.107/05 for returning back the meter rent alleged to have illegally collected from him. This Forum allowed the complaint in favour of the complainant on 30th September, 2005 citing the provisions in Sec.26(2) of Electricity Act 1910. The opposite parties remained exparte due to non-receipt of notice and the allegations could not opposed during the trial. 9. The opposite parties approached the Hon’ble Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission vide Appeal No.859/06 against the judgment of O.P.107/05. The Hon’ble Commission allowed the appeal and set aside the said opposite party. The Hon’ble Commission noted that the period 16.10.04 to 22.4.05 covered in the complaint is after the enactment of Electricity Act 2003 on 10.6.03 and that Sec.26(2) of Electricity Act 1910 is applicable only in cases prior to period of 10.6.03. The Hon’ble Commission also noted that Sec.26(2) of Electricity Act 1910 has been replaced by Sec.55 of Electricity Act 2003. 10. While the appeal was under consideration before the Hon’ble Commission, the complainant filed an Execution Petition vide E.P.23/06 in O.P.107/05 before this Forum. The opposite parties complied the judgment by remitting the decree amount of ` 1,069 on 1.12.06 before this Forum. The petition was allowed in favour of the complainant vide judgment dated 12th November 2008. This Forum released the decree amount to complainant. On 13.11.08 after obtaining a bond from the decree holder for remitting back the said amount in case the appeal before the CDRC is allowed in favour of the appellant. The opposite parties objected the release of the decree amount to complainant on the ground that the appeal was under consideration before the Hon’ble CDRC. 11. Opposite parties are not aware about the appeal preferred by the complainant before the Hon‘ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi. When the appeal was in favour of the opposite parties, the judgment in O.P.107/05 and its E.P.23/06 became null and void. The 1st opposite party as per the direction of the 2nd opposite party issued notices to the complainant on 15th October 2009 and 16th December 2009 for remitting back the amount of ` 1,069 with up to date interest. The complainant didn’t respond to both the notices. The electric connection to the complainant’s premises was disconnected on 29.12.09 by the opposite parties. A letter was received by the 3rd opposite party on 29.12.09 itself from the complainant challenging the legal authority of 3rd opposite party for issuing such notices. The letter dated 26.12.09 the complainant himself was ‘intimately silent’ on the remittance of ` 1,069 on 20.11.09 at the office of this Forum. 12. Neither the complainant nor the office of this Forum informed the opposite parties about the remittance of ` 1,069 by the complainant on 20.11.09. The opposite parties appreciate the dedication of the complainant for protecting our country during his military service. But that good work doesn’t give a license to the complainant for acting as per his wish and that too above the law. 13. Opposite parties 2 and 3 received the request of complainant after the service connection to the complainant’s premises was disconnected. The service connection to the complainant’s premises could not be reconnected on the ground that the complainant’s didn’t remit the amount with up to date interest and the complainant failed to prove that the amount was remitted at the office of this Forum. Moreover the complaint is immature to be considered before this Forum. Complainant has not approached any of the opposite parties before the date of disconnection and after the receipt of the two notices. The amount of `1,069 was released from the public account operated by the opposite parties on 1.12.06, which has not been received back bill date, based upon a wrong complaint and also wrong interpretation of prevailing law. The public money of ` 1,069 was in the hands of complainant from 13.11.08 up to 20.11.09, who transacted that money for his own private cause. Therefore, opposite parties canvassed for the dismissal of the complaint with cost. 14. From the above pleadings, following points are raised for consideration: (1) Whether the complaint is maintainable before the Forum? (2) Whether the relief sought for in the complaint are allowable? (3) Reliefs & Costs? 15. Evidence of the complaint consists of the proof affidavit filed by the complaint along with certain documents. He was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Ext.A1 to A9. 16. Evidence of the opposite parties consists of the proof affidavit filed by the 2nd opposite party along with certain documents. He was examined as DW1 and the documents produced were marked as Ext.B1 to B3. After closure of evidence, both parties were heard. 17. Point Nos. 1 to 3:- IN order to prove the complainant’s case, complainant filed proof affidavit along with certain documents. He was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Ext.A1 toA9. Ext.A1 is the copy of letter issued by 3rd opposite party dated 15.10.09. Ext.A2 is the bond-dated 13.11.08 executed by the complainant to CDRF, Pathanamthitta. Ext.A3 is the receipt of ` 1,069 issued by CDRF to complainant based on Ext.A2. Ext.A4 is the copy of letter dated 16.12.09 issued by opposite parties. Ext.A5 is the Medical Certificate dated 13.10.07 issued by Amritha Hospital. Ext.A6 is the copy of letter dated 1.1.10 given to Executive Engineer of KSEB by complainant. Ext.A7 is the copy of letter given to 3rd opposite party by complainant. Ext.A8 is the order of CDRF dated 12.11.08 by releasing the decree amount by furnishing Bond in E.P.No.23/06. Ext.A9 is the notice from Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dated 22.6.10. 18. In order to prove the opposite parties contention, 2nd opposite party filed proof affidavit along with certain documents. He was examined as DW1 and the documents produced were marked as Ext.B1 to B3. Ext.B1 is the copy of order dated 30.6.09 in Appeal No.859/06 of Hon’ble CDRC. Ext.B2 is the copy of petition filed by opposite parties stating that decree amount may not be released till the disposal of the appeal before the CDRC. Ext.B3 is the copy of written objection filed by opposite parties before the CDRF against the releasing of decree amount. 19. On the basis of the contention and averment of the parties, we have perused the entire material on record. Complainant’s case is that opposite parties disconnected electric connection in connection with an earlier dispute in O.P.No.107/05 and undertaking on the decretal amount in E.P.23/08 while the appeal has been pending before the Hon’ble CDRC. According to him, he complied the undertaking by return the amount of ` 1,069 to this Forum in cash on 20.11.09. Due to the disconnection, complainant and his family suffered untold miseries and hardship. 20. Opposite parties contention is that complainant secured an exparte order in O.P.No.107/05 and thereafter filed execution petition. While the appeal was under consideration opposite parties complied the judgment by remitting the decree amount of ` 1,069 before this Forum. Even though opposite parties objected, the said amount was released to complainant by executing a bond. Subsequently the appeal allowed in favour of the opposite parties. Opposite parties issued two notices to the complainant to remit back the amount of ` 1,069 in the light of Hon’ble CDRC order. Complainant has not returned the amount even after receiving two notices. But he remitted the amount before this Forum. The said remittance was not intimated to opposite parties. Even though complainant sent a reply notice on 26.12.09, but not disclosed that complainant has remitted the said amount on 20.11.09. Opposite parties disconnected the service connection of complainant’s premises not knowing that complainant remitted `1,069 before this Forum. Complainant has not approached any of the opposite parties before the date of disconnection and even after the receipt of two notices. The public money of ` 1,069 was in the hands of complainant from 13.11.08 to 20.11.09 and the said amount was used by the complainant for his own private use. 21. On a perusal of Ext.B3, it is learned that opposite parties imposed the responsibility of releasing the amount to the Forum and they are bound to obey the order. It means that they have such an extent a formal objection. More over at the time of hearing of E.P.No.23/06, the 3rd opposite party has not objected to release the deposit amount of Rs.1,068, which is evident in Ext.A8. By considering Ext.B3 and submission of 3rd opposite party before the Forum on 12.11.08, the Forum released as per condition of Ext.A2. Moreover, the opposite parties have not obtained a stay order against the execution of E.P.23/06 from Hon’ble CDRC. Therefore, there is no basis in opposite parties’ contention that this Forum has released the amount without considering their objection. 22. If appeal was in favour of opposite parties, complainant is bound to obey the Ext.A2 bond. Ext.A8 order also mentioned that if the appeal is in favour of opposite parties, the complainant is to remit back the said amount as per Ext.A2. Ext.A2 also shows that the amount has to be return back to the Forum or as per the direction of the Forum. 23. On a perusal of evidence on record, it is learned that after getting Ext.B1 copy opposite parties have not care to approach this Forum to release the amount by complying Ext.A2. If they approached the Forum would have issued notice to complainant to remit the amount as per Ext.A2. But opposite parties neither approached the Forum nor go through Ext.A2. They initiate proceeding against complainant by their own way by issuing Ext.A2 and A4. They also demanded interest of the amount which is not in conformity with Ext.B1. Complainant also given reply letters as per Ext.A6 and A7. But he has not disclosed the remittance of amount before the Forum. Opposite parties disconnected the electric connection after issuing Ext.A4. 24. It is pertinent to note that complainant executed Ext.A2 as a security for releasing the amount. If he fails to comply Ext.A2, it becomes a civil contempt and this Forum has ample power to punish the contemnor. Sec.2(b) of the Contempt Act reads as follows:- 2(b) “Civil Contempt” means willful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or willful breach of undertaking given to a court. 25. If any violation of Ext.A2, the opposite parties has ample provision to initiate proceeding against the complainant lawfully by an application before this Forum. Evidence on record shows that 3rd opposite party initiate there own proceeding directly against the complainant. It is not fair and just on the part of public functionaries to take law in their own hand by disregarding the judicial orders pending before a competent Forum. The disconnection of electric supply is a punitive step it has to be done sparingly not mechanically. The concerned official has done such act which is ultra virus having no authority to do so until and unless Ext.A2 is persisting. 26. Material on record shows that complainant has remitted the amount of ` 1,069 before this Forum on 20.11.09. But he has not disclosed the remittance of the said amount in Ext.A7 reply on 26.12.09. It is not a proper attitude on the part of the complainant. As a consumer he has to disclose the true fact there by avoid the further consequences. 27. From the fact and circumstances and available evidence on record, we come to the conclusion that complainant has suffered a lot due to the disconnection of electric connection. But according to opposite parties, they are not aware of the remittance of ` 1,069 before this Forum. Evidence on record shows that complainant has not intimated the remittance of the amount. Therefore, we are of the view that opposite parties would not have disconnected the service connection if they have any knowledge regarding the remittance of the amount. This makes their act less civior. Even then their act of omission to resort proceeding as per Ext.A2 is not excusable. It is a certain extent a mere imperfection on their part. Therefore for the ends of justice complainant is allowable in part by imposing a meagre amount as compensation. The fact and circumstances and nature of the case we are not inclined to allow any cost. 28. In the result, complaint is allowed in part, thereby opposite parties are directed to pay ` 750 (Rupees Seven hundred and Fifty only) as compensation to the complainant. The amount so awarded is to be paid within one month from the date of receiving of this order, failing which the whole amount will follow 9% interest from this date, till the realisation of the whole amount. Declared in the Open Forum on this the 18th day of January, 2011. (Sd/-) N. Premkumar, (Member) Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) : (Sd/-) Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member) : (Sd/-) Appendix: Witness examined on the side of the complainant: PW1 : G.N. Raveendra Panicker Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant: A1 : Copy of letter dated 15.10.09 issued by 3rd opposite party to the complainant. A2 : Photocopy of the bond dated 13.11.08 executed by the complainant to CDRF, Pathanamthitta. A3 : Receipt dated 20.11.09 for Rs.1,069 issued by CDRF to complainant. A4 : Copy of letter dated 16.12.09 issued by 3rd opposite party to the complainant. A5 : Photocopy of the Medical Certificate dated 13.10.07 issued by Amritha Hospital. A6 : Photocopy of letter dated 1.1.10 sent by the complainant to the 2nd opposite party. A7 : Photocopy of letter dated 26.12.09 sent by the complainant to the 3rd opposite party. A8 : Copy of order dated 12.11.08 issued by CDRF, Pathanamthitta. A9 : Photocopy of the intimation letter dated 22.6.10 from Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to the complainant. Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties: DW1 : Harikumar. BExhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties: B1 : Photocopy of order dated 30.6.09 in Appeal No.859/06 of Hon’ble CDRC. B2 : Photocopy of petition filed by the 2nd opposite party before the CDRF, Pathanamthitta.. B3 : Photocopy of objection filed by the 3rd opposite party before the CDRF, Pathanamthitta. (By Order) Senior Superintendent Copy to:- (1) G.N. Ravindra Panicker, Gopalapurathu House, Thekkuthodu.P.O., (Via) Konni, Pathanamthitta Dist, Pin – 689 699 (2) The Secretary, KSEB, Vaidyuthi Bhavan, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram. (3) Asst. Exe. Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, KSEB, Pathanamthitta. (4) Asst.Engineer, KSEB, Electrical Section, Konni. (5) The Stock File. | 
