THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM<br /> Present:<br /> Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President<br /> Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member<br /> CC No. 206/2007.<br /> Wednesday, the 30th day of July, 2008.<br /> Petitioner : Rajamma Santhosh,<br /> Chozhamcheriyil<br /> Vaikaprayar P.O,<br /> Vaikom.<br /> Vs.<br /> Opposite parties : 1) The Secretary,<br /> Vaidyuthi Bhavan,<br /> Pattom, Trivandrum.<br /> <br /> 2) The Assistant Engineer,<br /> KSEB, Vaikom.<br /> <br /> 3) The Asst. Exe. Engineer,<br /> KSEB, Vaikom.<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath, President.<br /> <br /> Case of the petitioner's is as follows:<br /> The petitioner as a means of self employment conducted a flour mill during the period of 1996 to 2001, due to the burning of the motor, the flour mill become defunct. According to the petitioner all bills issued by the opposite party were remitted and no amounts were due to the opposite party. On 3..8..2001 the meter was dismantled by the board authorities and petitioner was served with a notice dtd: 22..5..2007 showing payment of an amount of Rs. 9,770/-. According to the petitioner there is no such amount due to the opposite party and issuance of the said demand notice is a clear deficiency of service so, she prays for cancellation of bill and also she claims compensation in the tune of Rs. 2,000/-.<br /> <br /> -2-<br /> The opposite party entered appearance and filed version contenting that petition is not maintainable. The connection of the petitioner was effected on 3..2..96 under LT IV category and connection was dismantled on 3..8..2001 as per the request of the consumer. During December 1999 the board issued an additional bill amounting Rs. 3,222/- and the petitioner approached the CDRF by filing a petition as O.P No. 1044/99, the Forum ordered the consumer to remit amount in 15 instalment but she had paid only 4 instalments and as such an amount of Rs. 2,422/- is now due towards board. In addition to that the petitioner had failed to remit an amount of Rs. 3,305/- as current charge. An amount of Rs. 800/- is to be refunded to the consumer. So,after deducting that<br /> amount the petitioner has to pay an amount of Rs. 6,613/- the opposite party states that the demand issued to the petitioner is legal so the petition is to be dismissed with their costs.<br /> Points for determinations are:<br /> i) Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?<br /> ii) Reliefs and costs.<br /> Evidence in this case consists of affidavit filed by both parties and Ext. A1 document on the side of the petitioner.<br /> Point No. 1<br /> The opposite party in their version contented that an amount of Rs. 2,242/- is outstanding as the decree amount in O.P 1044/99 the other amounts are current charge dues for the period from 3/2000 to 8/01. The opposite party admitted that petitioner had remitted an amount of Rs. 800/- as cash deposit and said amount is to be refunded. As per section 56 (2) of the Electricity Act 2003 no sum due from any consumer shall be <br /> -3-<br /> recoverable after a period of 2 years from the date when such sum become first due unless such sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrear of charges for electricity supplied so, we are of the opinion that the claim of the amount other than the decree amount in O.P 1044/99 is time barred and the opposite party admitted that an amount of Rs. 800/- is to be refunded to the petitioner. So, we are of the opinion that after deducting the said amount of Rs. 800/-. The petitioner has to remit an amount of Rs. 1,522/- to the opposite party. So, point No. 1 is found accordingly.<br /> Point No. 2<br /> In view of finding in point No. 1, petition is allowed in part. In the result the demand notice dtd: 22..5..2007 claiming an amount of Rs. 9770/- is here by cancelled and the petitioner is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 1522/- towards the opposite party and also that to in 4 equal instalments. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, no cost and compensation is ordered.<br /> Dictated by me transcribed by the Confidential Assistant, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of July, 2008.