O R D E R Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President. Case of the petitioner filed on 4..8..2008 is as follows: Petitioner is the secretary of Athurasevasanghom a registered charitable trust. President of the sanghom availed an electrical connection from the opposite party electricity board. According to the petitioner he was regularly paying the current charges. Meter reader of the opposite party is visiting the premises of the petitioner and the petitioner is regularly paying current charges as per the bills issued by the opposite party. . On 25..7..2008 the officials of 3rd opposite party inspected the meter and premises of the petitioner prepared a site mahazar. On 28..7..2008 3rd opposite party issued a penal bill to the petitioner -2- alleging additional connected load for Rs. 53,010/-. According to the petitioner bill issued to the petitioner is without any basis and is a clear deficiency in service. So, he prays for cancellation of the bill Dtd: 28..7..2008. Petitioner claims Rs. 20,000/- 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 on 25..7..2008 the section squad of the electrical section, Kurichi inspected the premises of the consumer No. 62 and found additional connected load. Site mahazar was prepared on the spot and the copy of the same was served to the petitioner. According to the opposite party their was unauthorized load in the of the petitioner. So opposite party issued a bill for Rs. 53,010/-. On verification of the above bill a clerical mistake was found and revised penal bill amounting Rs. 49,403/- was issued to the consumer on 15..9..2008. According to the opposite party there is no deficiency in service on their part and 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 affidavit filed by both parties and Ext. A1 document on the side of the petitioner and Ext. B1 to B4 documents on the side of the opposite party? -3- Point No. 1 According to the opposite party bill is issued under section 126 of electricity act 2003 for the unauthorized additional load. Opposite party produced copy of the mahazar prepared by the opposite party on 28..7..2008 said document is marked as Ext. B1. Petitioner had signed on Ext. B1 mahazar. Petitioner has no dispute with regard to the mahazar prepared. From Ext. B1 it can be seen that petitioner is un authorizedly using the connected load other than the allotted connected load. So, in our view we cannot attributed any deficiency in service in issuing disputed bill. So, point No. 1 is found accordingly. Point No. 2 In view of the finding in point No. 1. Petition is dismissed. By taking a lenient view we allow the petitioner to remit the amount in 4 equal monthly installments. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case no cost and compensation is ordered. Dictated by me transcribed by the Confidential Assistant corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 25th day of May, 2010. Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/- Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member Sd/- APPENDIX Document for the petitioner: Ext. A1: Copy of bill Dtd: 28..7..2008 Documents for the opposite party: Ext. B1: Copy of the Mahazar Dtd: 27..3..2008 Ext. B2: Copy of board order Dtd: 7..2..2008 Ext. B3: Copy of meter reading register Ext. B4: Copy of bill Dtd: 28..7..2008. By Order, Senior Superintendent
| | HONORABLE Bindhu M Thomas, Member | HONORABLE Santhosh Kesava Nath P, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE K.N Radhakrishnan, Member | | 
