Kerala

Kasaragod

C.C.No.59/2006

Maimoona - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary - Opp.Party(s)

Babuchandran .K

27 Mar 2009

ORDER


IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
OLD S.P. OFFICE, PULIKUNNU
consumer case(CC) No. C.C.No.59/2006

Maimoona
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Secretary
The Asst.Engineer,
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. K.T.Sidhiq 2. P.P.Shymaladevi 3. P.Ramadevi

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. Maimoona

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. Secretary 2. The Asst.Engineer,

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. Babuchandran .K

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. A.B.Nair



ORDER

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.

                                                                                    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