O R D E R Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member. The crux of the complainant’s case is as follows: Comp;ainant is the consumer of electric connection with consumer No. 9427 of Electrical Section Manarcadu. The complainant is conducting a laundry by way of self employment which is for their livelihood. The opposite party conducted an inspection in the said premises on 25..6..2007 and issued bill No. 002883 dtd: 27..6..2009 for Rs. 37,785/- alleging that there was an unauthorized load of 10 KW. They have imposed penalty at two times the normal charge for 12 months and other charges at exorbitant rate. The allegation that there was an unauthorized load of 10 KW is without any basis. Fearing disconnection the complainant applied for installment. Payment in 4 installments was allowed and accordingly the complainant has paid Rs. 19,000/- on 3..7..2009 and 2nd installment of Rs. 4912/- on 5..8..2009. The opposite parties also issued the bill No. 86640 dtd: 3..8..2009 fro Rs. 8570/- and the complainant paid the amount on 6..8..2009. -2- The complainant alleged that the bill issued is unjust and illegal. Hence the complainant filed this complaint praying to set aside the bill No. 002883 for Rs. 37,785/- and bill No. 86640 for Rs. 8570/-, to refund the total amount Rs. 38,744/- paid to the opposite party, compensation Rs. 5000/- and cost. The opposite parties entered appearance and filed version with the following main contentions. i) The complainant’s authorized connected load is only 1 KW. On inspection it was found that their total connected load is 11 KW and a site mahazar was prepared and was signed by a staff of the unit. Based on the site mahazar a bill was prepared as per S-126 of Electricity Amendment Act 2007 and S- 50(5) & (6) of terms and conditions of supply. According to this, penalty must be imposed on both FC and CC for the last 12 months and thus a bill for Rs. 37,785/- was issued to the complainant. ii) Along with the bill a letter was also served which stated that the consumer could approach the KSEB authorities if there was any dispute regarding the bill. Instead of approaching the authority for aforesaid purpose the complainant asked for installment facility and was granted five installments. iii) The complainant paid the first two installments amounting to Rs. 23,697/- which implies that there was no dispute regarding the bill. iv) Bill No. 86640 dated 3..8..2009 for Rs. 8,570/- was the normal bimonthly bill and therefore the consumer is bound to pay the bill. -3- The opposite parties contented that the bill dated 27..6..2009 was prepared basing on the site mahazar prepared on 25..6..2009 and as per rule 126 of Electricity Amendment Act 2007 and S-50 (5) & (6) of Terms and conditions of supply. The bill is legal and there is no deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. Hence the opposite parties prayed to dismiss the complaint by giving orders to the complainant to remit balance amount of Rs. 14,088/- plus surcharge to KSEB. Points for consideration are: i) Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties? ii) Relief and cost? Evidence consists of affidavits filed by both parties and exhibits A1 to A4 series, and B1 to B5 (e). Point No. 1 The opposite party produced copy of the site mahazar and it is marked as exhibit B1. The opposite party averred that during inspection a total connected load of 11 KW was detected and the load details are clearly mentioned in the site mahazar. The opposite party further averred that the registered connected load was only 1 KW and hence the unauthorized connected load was 10 KW. Where as the complainant contented that the site mahazar is a fabricated one and the allegation that there was an unauthorized load of 10 KW is false. In our view there is no reason to disbelieve the site mahazar which is prepared by a KSEB officer and signed by the staff of the complainant. -4- The copy of the meter reading register is produced and marked as exhibit B2. From exhibit B2, it is difficult to find out from which date the complainant started using electricity unauthorized. The copies of the application form submitted by the complainant for conversion of 1 phase to 3 phase with connected load 9544 watts and the completion report are produced and marked as exhibits B5 (a) to B5 (d). On perusing exhibit B5 (e) completion report, it is seen that the connected load 9544 watts furnished in the said report is almost identical with the connected load as per the site mahazar. The complainant submitted that he has no duty to pay the amount Rs. 8570/- as per bill No. 86640 dated 3..8..2009. But according to the opposite party the said bill was only normal bimonthly bill and therefore the consumer is bound to pay the bill. In our opinion also, consumer is bound to pay the normal current bills. From the facts and circumstances of this case, we find that the penal bill issued by the opposite party is correct and legal. Hence we cannot attribute any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Point No. 1 is found accordingly. Point No. 2 The complainant produced two original bills evidencing the part remittance of the disputed bill amount in installments. These bills are marked as exhibit A4 and Exhibit A4 (a). As per exhibit A4 (a) the balance amount to be paid to the opposite party is Rs. 14,088/-. The complainant produced another original bill evidencing the payment of the normal bimonthly bill amounting Rs. 8570/-. It is marked as exhibit A4 (b). -5- In view of the findings in point No. 1. The complaint is ordered as follows: The complaint is dismissed. Taking a lenient view we allow the complainant to remit the balance amount in three equal monthly installments along with the future bills. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case no cost and compensation ordered. Both sides will bear their costs. Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member Sd/- Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President Sd/- Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member Sd/- APPENDIX Documents of the complainant Ext. A1: Original bill dtd: 27..06..2009 Ext. A2: Original bill dtd: 3..8..2009 Ext. A3: The original notice issued by the opposite party to the petitioner dtd: 27..6..2009. Ext. A4: Original bill dtd: 3..7..2009 Ext. A4(a) Original bill dtd: 5..8..2009 Ext. A4(b) Original bill dtd: 6..8..2009 Documents produced by the opposite parties: Ext. B1 Copy of the mahazar Ext. B2: Copy of meter reading register Ext. B3: Copy of consumer’s personal deposit register Ext. B4: Copy of notice dtd: 27..6..2009 Ext. B5: Copy of application form Ext. B5(a) Copy of reverse side of the application form Ext. B5(b) Copy of application form Ext. B5(c) Copy of application form Ext. B5(d) Copy of completion report. By Order, Senior Superintendent
| | HONORABLE Bindhu M Thomas, Member | HONORABLE Santhosh Kesava Nath P, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE K.N Radhakrishnan, Member | | 
