IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 27th day of September, 2023
Present: Sri.Manulal.V.S, President
Smt.Bindhu.R, Member
Sri.K.M.Anto, Member
CC No.274/2022 (Filed on 14/12/2022)
Complainant : Ponnesan M.M,
Maratherichira House,
Veloor P.O,
Kottayam - 686 003.
Vs.
Opposite party : The State Nodal Officer,
Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.,
Electrical Section,
Kottayam Central,
Kottayam – 686 001.
O R D E R
Sri.Manulal.V.S, President
The complaint is filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.
Case of the complainant is as follows:
The complainant is a consumer of the second opposite party vide Consumer No.1146346013862. In the house of the complainant Rooftop Solar Power Projects installed by the KSEB. The complainant and the KSEB entered into an agreement on 27/01/2020 for the same. At the time of entering the agreement the opposite party made the complainant believe that the electricity charges for him would be a nominal one. Usually, the opposite party has issued a bill of Rs.200/- to the complainant as energy charges. On 1/12/2022 the opposite party issued a bill for an amount of Rs.1,248/- including Rs.1003.50 as EC (self-Generation) and Rs.100.35 of electrical duty. The complainant is further made to believe that there will be no tariff hike for the agreement period of 25 years. It is alleged in the complaint that the opposite party did not inform the complainant or give any notice to him regarding the excess charges levied from him. So, this complaint is filed by the complainant praying for an order to direct the opposite parties not to collect any amount under the head of self generation and reduce Rs.1,004/- which is collected excessively from the future bills of the complainant.
Upon notice opposite party appeared before the Commission and filed version contenting as follows:
The complainant is a consumer of the opposite party having a domestic electricity connection vide Consumer No.1146346013862 with a connected load of 4343 watts. The complainant has registered with the opposite party for roof top Soura Project and opted for Model II project. The complainant entered into an agreement for the same on 27/01/2020. Under the model II project the Solar Plant shall be installed on the roof of the building of the complainant at the cost of KSEB. The complainant can consume the energy produced to buy the plant at a fixed tariff and the period of agreement was 25 years and there will be no hike of tariff during the period of agreement. As per annexure III of the agreement the tariff shall be Rs.4.50 for unit during the period of the agreement. The generation of power from the solar plant which was installed in the premises of the complainant was started on 27/11/2020.
It is submitted in the version that from 27/11/2020 the electricity generated from the Solar Plant was to be levied at the rate of Rs.4.50 per unit. But due to the delay caused in upgrading the software the opposite party was not able to issue the actual bill to the complainant. So, the bill for minimum charges was issued to the complainant. The upgradation of the software was completed in December 2022 and the complainant was issued a bill at the rate of 4.50 per unit which was the agreed rate. The complainant was issued with the bill of the month of December for his consumption of the 223 unit. It is further submitted in the version that in the month of December 2022 there was a decrease of Rs.138/- in electricity bill of the complainant after the installation of the solar plant. The consumption of the complainant in the months of January and February 2023 was 219 units and 184 units respectively. Bills for Rs.1,229/- and Rs.1,046/- issued to the complainant for the month of January 2023 and February 2023. The complainant had paid these amounts without any objection. The average consumption of the complainant is between 200 and 220 units. The bill for the month of December 2022 issued by the opposite party as per the agreed rate.
The complainant filed the proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and marked Exhibits A1 to A4. No oral or documentary evidence from the side of the opposite party.
On evaluation of complaint, version and evidence on record we would like to consider the following points:
(1)Whether the complainant has succeeded to prove deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party ?
(2)If so, what are the reliefs and cost?
POINTS 1 & 2
There is no dispute on the fact that the complainant is a consumer of the opposite party having a domestic electricity connection vide Consumer Number 1146346013862 with a connected load of 4343 watts. It is admitted by both the parties that the complainant entered into an agreement with the opposite party for generating electricity under the Soura Project (Model II) on 27/01/2020. Exhibit A1 is the agreement executed between the complainant and the opposite party under Soura Project (Model II).
The specific case of the complainant is that though the opposite party made him believe that there will be no tariff hike for the agreement period of 25 years, but on 1/12/2022 opposite party issued a bill for an amount of Rs.1,248/- including Rs.1003.50 as EC (self-Generation) and Rs.100.35 as electrical duty.
It is contended by the opposite party that as per Exhibit A1 agreement the complainant is eligible to consume upto 250 units per month at the rate of Rs.4.50 for the period of 25 years. It is submitted by the opposite party that due to the delay in upgrading the software they issued to start the bill for the energy charges as per Exhibit A1 agreement from the month of December 2022.
As per Clause VI of Exhibit A1 agreement the complainant shall be eligible to consume the whole energy produced by the plant at a uniform tariff during the agreement period. The tariff shall be in the range of Rs. 4.50 to Rs.5.95 for various consumer categories. The category wise tariff table is attached as annexure III. On going through the annexure III of Exhibit A1 we can see that the tariff for LT domestic connection up to 250 units is Rs. 4.50 per unit.
It is stated in the version that the consumption of the complainant in the month of December 2022 was 223 units. The energy charges in the month of December 2022 were Rs.1003.50(223x.4.50) and the complainant is bound to pay duty @ 10% which amounts to Rs.100.35 and fixed charges of Rs.110/-, meter rent of Rs.30/- and GST For rupees 30/- @ 18% i.e., Rs.5.40. So, a bill for an amount of Rs.1249.25 was issued to the complainant. According to the opposite party there was a considerable reduction in the energy charge of the complainant after the installation of the solar power plants at the cost of the opposite party.
Clause IV of the Exhibit A1 states that the parties to the agreement agreed to abide by the relevant provisions of the Electricity Act 2003 and applicable regulations and all amendments made there in from time to time and all relevant regulation regarding the supply of electricity. Thus, the complainant is bound to pay all the charges which were regulated for the supply of the electricity by the concerned authorities.
Based on the aforesaid discussions, we are of the opinion that the complainant failed to prove that the opposite party has illegally collected any amount from the complainant and the complaint is devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed . In the result the complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 27th day of September, 2023
Sri.Manulal.V.S, President Sd/-
Smt.Bindhu.R, Member Sd/-
Sri.K.M.Anto, Member Sd/-
APPENDIX :
Exhibits from the side of the Complainant :
A1 - Copy of Agreement executed between the complainant
and the opposite party under Soura Project (Model II)
A2 - Copy of Electricity Bill dated 01/10/2022 for Rs.191/-
A3 - Copy of Property Tax receipt dated 20/04/2022
A4 - Copy of Land Tax Receipt dated 25/04/2022
Exhibits from the side of Opposite Party :
Nil By Order, Sd/- Assistant Registrar
