Date of filing : 12-05-2006 Date of order : 27-03-2009. IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD C.C.No.59/2009 Dated this, the 27th day of March 2009. PRESENT SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER SMT.P.P.SHYMALADEVI : MEMBER Maimoona, W/o.Jaleel Koya, R/at Kizhoor, PO.Chandragiri, } Complainant Kalanad Village. (Adv. Babu Chandran, Kasaragod) 1. The Kerala State Electricity Board, Rep. by its Secretary, Vaidyuthi Bhavan, } Opposite parties Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The Assistant Engineer, K.S.E.B, Electrical Section, Po.Udma, Kasaragod. (Adv. A.B. Nair, Kasaragod) O R D E R SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT In brief the case of the complainant Maimoona is that the electricity service connection provided by the opposite parties to her house was disconnected on 30-05-2005 alleging that she was using the electricity for domestic purpose that was given for agricultural purpose. Against the illegal disconnection she filed a suit before the Munsiff Court and he learned Munsiff decreed the suit declaring that the disconnection order was null and void. Now in this complaint she is claiming compensation of Rs.25000/- for the mental agony and hardship suffered due to illegal act of opposite party with Rs.5000/- which she incurred for filing suit before the Munsiff Court. 2. Opposite party filed version . According to opposite party they complied the order of the Munsiff by reconnecting the electric connection. The Munsiff Court while elaborately discussing the case found that the parties should suffer their respective costs. If the complainant is opposed by the decree or judgment of the Munsiff Court, the remedy available was to file an appeal against the said order. Instead, the complaint filed by the complainant for same cause of action is barred by resjudicata. 3. Complainant Maimoona filed affidavit. Exts A1 to A2 marked. For opposite parties Ext.B1 marked. Both sides heard. 4. The complainant is claiming compensation for the illegal disconnection of her electric connection with the expenses she incurred for the suit she filed before the Munsiff Court, Kasaragod. The Munsiff in the judgment declared the disconnection notice by opposite parties issued to the complainant as null and void and the suit was decreed directing the parties to bear their respective costs. The learned counsel for the opposite parties Shri.P. Raghavan, vehemently argued that the instant complainant is filed with a prayer that ought to have been made before the appellate court of the Munsiff and the complainant now trying to convert the Forum as the appellate authority of the Munsiff Court. We accept the contention of the counsel for the opposite parties that the relief sought by the complainant is outside the scope of a complaint of this nature hence dismiss the complaint without any order as to cost. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Exts. A1. 30-05-05. letter sent by OP No.2 to complainant. A2. OS. No.191/2005 Certified copy B1. 2-6-05 Letter sent by OP No.2 to complainant. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Pj/ Forwarded by Order SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
......................K.T.Sidhiq ......................P.P.Shymaladevi ......................P.Ramadevi | |