Kerala

Kollam

CC/07/286

D.Stanly,Shalem,Thrikkannamangal,Kottarakara(P.O)-691506 - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary,K.S.E.B,Govt.Secrateriate,Thiruvananthapuram and 3 others - Opp.Party(s)

30 Mar 2009

ORDER


C.D.R.F. KOLLAM : CIVIL STATION - 691013
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::: KOLLAM
consumer case(CC) No. CC/07/286

D.Stanly,Shalem,Thrikkannamangal,Kottarakara(P.O)-691506
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Secretary,K.S.E.B,Govt.Secrateriate,Thiruvananthapuram and 3 others
Deputy Chief Engineer,K.S.E.B,Vaidhyuthi Bhavan,Kottarakara
Executive Engineer,K.S.E.B,33 KV Transmission Division,Vaidhyuthi Bhavan,Kottarakara
Asst.Engineer,K.S.E.B,33 KV Sub station,Chengamanadu,Kottarakara
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. K. VIJAYAKUMARAN : President 2. RAVI SUSHA : Member

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

ADV. RAVI SUSHA, MEMBER.

The complainant filed this case for getting compensation and cost from the opp.parties.

The contents of the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows”

On 10.7.2007 the complainant’s electrical APPLIANCES such as 3 electric fans, mixi, Electronic Tube light, Tape recorder, C.F light and Telephone were destroyed due to fire.   According the complainant it was so happened due to the over flow of electricity through the 33 KV electric line and alleged deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties.  Hence  file complaint for getting compensation and cost.

PW.1 examined.  Ext.P1 to P3 series marked.

 

          Opp.parties did not file version or not adduced evidence.  As the opp.parties did not file version or not adduced any evidence, we are constrained to rely upon the evidence adduced by the complainant.   For proving the case the complainant produced exts P1 to P3 series.   Through the complaint, affidavit and documents the complainant proved her case.  We find there is deficiency in service on the part of opp.parties.

 

          In the result the complaint is allowed.  Opp.parties are directed to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as compensation.  Opp.parties are also directed to pay Rs.500/- as cost.   The order is to be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

 

Dated this the 30th day of March, 2009.

 

I N D E X

List of witnesses for the complainant

PW.1. – Stanly

List of documents for the complainant

P1. – Copy of complaint dt. 16.7.2007

P2. – Paper publication

P3. – Purchase bills

 




......................K. VIJAYAKUMARAN : President
......................RAVI SUSHA : Member