O R D E R Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President Case of the petitioner filed on 25..5..2008 is as follows: Petitioner is the consumer of the first opposite party electricity board with vide consumer No. 6084 of Electrical Major Section, KSEB Ettumanoor. Petitioner availed the electric connection for a sawmill and carpentry work as a source of his livelihood. Petitioner was regularly paying current charges which he consumed. The meter reader of the consumer is visiting the premises of the petitioner and spot bills were issued to the petitioner. On 16..5..2008 the 3rd opposite party given a notice to the petitioner stating that connected load of the -2- petitioner is excessive and issued a bill for Rs. 12,369/-. Bill was issued as a penal assessment for 12 months for un authorized load of six K.W. According to the petitioner the bill is issued without any authority and is baseless. Act of the opposite party in issuing the bill is a clear deficiency in service. So, he prays for a direction to the opposite party to cancel the bill dt: 19..5..2008 for an amount of Rs. 12,361/-. Petitioner claims Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and cost of the proceedings. Opposite party entered appearance and filed version contenting that the petition is not maintainable. According to the opposite party there is no cause of action for the opposite party. Asst. Exe. Engineer, KSEB Electrical Section, Ettumanoor is mistakenly joined by the petitioner as 2nd opposite party instead of Asst. Exe. Engineer, Pala. A provisional invoice bill as per section 126 of the electricity act 2003 was issued to the petitioner . But petitioner has not filed any objection to the assessment. Petitioner has not preferred appeal before the appellate authority and approach this forum without exhausting statutory remedies. The electric connection to the petitioner is a three phase service connection, with a sanctioned connected load of 43 watts under LT IV industrial tariff, under Electrical section, Kidangoor. A surprise inspection was conducted in the petitioner’s premises on 15..5..2008 by the board authorities in the presence of the petitioners representatives. At the time of inspection an unauthorised load of 5545 watts( 6 KW) is found in the petitioners premises. So, bill was issued as per law for un authorised additional load. Opposite party -3- contented that there is no deficiency in service on their part. they pray for dismissal of the petition with their costs. Points for determinations are: i) Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? ii) Relief and costs. Evidence in this case consists of the affidavit filed by both parties and Ext. A1 document on the side of the petitioner and Ext. B1 to B5 series documents on the side of the opposite parties. and C1 Commission Report. Point No. 1 Petitioner produced a copy of the bill dated 19..5..2008 said document is marked as Ext. A1. According to the petitioner Ext. A1 provisional Assessment and subsequent final bill issued by opposite party is without any basis and is liable to be cancelled. Petitioner submitted that their was no such unauthorized additional load in the premises of the petitioner as alleged by the opposite party. Opposite party produced a site Mahazar prepared by the opposite party at the time of inspection conducted in the premises of the petitioner copy of the site Mahazar is marked as Ext. B1. Opposite party vehumently argued that as per Ext. B1 their is unauthorized additional load of 6 K.W. During trial petitioner filed an application for appointment of an expert commissioner. As per order dtd: 19..6..2009 in IA 288/09 Deputy electrical Inspector, who is in charge of opposite parties electrical Division, is appointed as the expert Commissioner. -4- Commissioner who inspected the premises filed a report and the report is marked as Ext. C1. In the report commissioner reported that the total connected load is 48.36. Opposite party filed objection to the C1 report stating that it is not acceptable. Further more according to opposite party the connected load of the petitioner on their inspection at 2 occasion, ie. on 15..5..2008 and 8..4..2009 were 49.345 K.W. and 52.097 kw. respectively. Reason for change of the connected load according to opposite party is that some machines like hand drill and rooter connected at the time of inspection of the opposite party were dismantled during commissioners inspection. Further more during commissioners inspection 2 fan points are connected additionally and some wirings were dismantled. So, opposite party argued that petitioner was changing the load unauthorizedly. In our view opposite party has not proved the probability of use of un authorized additional load, dismantling of connected load etc. by examining the electrical Inspector. Who submitted the C1 report. We can rely only on the independent experts C1 report. Admittedly provisional bill under section 126 (2) of Electricity Act 2003 is issued to the petitioner and no. Final bill issued. In the light of C1 report we find deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in issuing Ext. A1 provisional bill. Point No. 1 is found accordingly.. Point No. 2 In view of the finding in point No. 1, petition is allowed. The provisional bill dated 19..5..2008 for an amount of Rs. 12,369/- is cancelled. Opposite party is ordered to issue a final bill in the light of C1 report. Considering the facts and -5- circumstances of the case no cost and compensation is ordered. Order shall be complied with within one month of receipt of copy of the order. Dictated by me transcribed by the Confidential Assistant corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 29th day of June, 2010. Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/- Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member Sd/- Sri. K.N Radhakrishnan, Member Sd/- APPENDIX Documents for the Petitioner: Ext. A1: Copy of the bill Dtd: 19..5..2008 for an amount of Rs. 12,369/- Documents for the Opposite party: Ext. B1: Copy of site mahazar Dtd: 15..5..2008 Ext. B2: Copy of provisional bill dtd: 19..5..2008 Ext. B3: Copy of bill dtd: 27..5..2008 Ext. B4: Copy of site mahazar dtd: 8..4..2009 Ext. B5: Copy of bill dtd: 23..4..2009 Ext. B5(a) Copy of notice dtd: 23..4..2009. By Order, Senior Superintendent
| | HONORABLE Bindhu M Thomas, Member | HONORABLE Santhosh Kesava Nath P, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE K.N Radhakrishnan, Member | | 
