IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 30th day of April, 2016
Filed on 03.04.2016
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavior (Member)
- Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member)
in
C.C.No.100/2014
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri. Abdul Jabbar 1. The Sub Engineer
Thaiprambu Electrical Section
Neerkkunnam Punnapra, Alappuzha
Vandanam P.O., Alappuzha
(By Adv. E. Rafeek) 2. The Assistant Engineer
Electrical Section, Punnapra
Alappuzha
3. The Deputy Chief Engineer
Electrical Circle, Alappuzha
4. Kerala State Electricity Board
Represented by its Secretary
Vaidhyudthi Bhavan
Thiruvananthapuram
(By Adv. Jayan C. Das – for
opposite parties 1 to 4)
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant is a consumer of the KSEB Electrical Section, Punnapra having Consumer No.15452. The electric connection was secured in the beginning for commercial purpose in the year 2005 for starting a ladies tailoring shop and was converted into domestic purpose on 27.02.2012 by giving an application to the second opposite party when the complainant stopped the tailoring shop and built a house and for residential purposes. At that time the complainant is residing in another
house in the same premises. The officials attached with Punnapra Electrical Section inspected the house and converted the above consumer connection from commercial to domestic purpose with a connected load of 1468 watts and the complainant is paying electricity charges on receiving bills based on I-A Tariff (Domestic connection). From 25.9.2013 onwards the tenant and her family is residing in the said house and the complainant is residing in another house in the same premises. On 27.01.2014 first opposite party along with some officials from KSEB inspected the complainant’s house and issued a short assessment bill dated 28.01.2014 for an amount of Rs.37,440/-, with retrospective effect from 3/12 to 1/14 stating that the house is being used for running a lodge. The complainant preferred a complaint against that to the second opposite party on 31.1.2014. The second opposite party did not accept the complainant’s claim and finalized the provisional assessment bill. Complainant suffered a lot by the illegal inspection and issuance of short assessment bill of Rs.37,440/-. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the complaint is filed.
2. The version of the first opposite parties is as follows:-
The complaint is not maintainable. The assessment was made by the opposite parties u/s 126(1) under the Electricity Act. Hence consumer Forum lacks jurisdiction to entertain the assessment u/s 126 of the act. Complainant is a consumer with the opposite party under LT VII B with a connection load of 200 watts. As per the request of the complainant consumer it was changed to LT I A with effect from 27.2.2012. Complainant is not residing along with his family as stated in the complaint. He has conducting a ladies hostel in the said building. A surprise inspection was made by the opposite party on 27.1.2014 and found that energy is used for running a hostel. Complainant himself admitted that he is running a hostel in the said building. The tariff of hostel is of LT VII A. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
3. Along with the complaint an interim application is filed restraining the opposite parties from collecting the arrears of electricity charge and also directing the opposite parties to collect future electricity charge in as per the electricity charge in IA domestic tariff until further orders.
4. Complainant was examined as PW1. Documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A7. Commissioner was appointed by the Forum as per the application filed by the complainant and the Advocate Commissioner was examined as CW1. The commission report is marked as Ext.C1. The opposite party was examined as RW1. One witness was examined as RW2. The documents produced were marked as Exts.B1 to B5.
5. The points came up for considerations are:-
- Whether complaint is maintainable?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief and cost?
6. According to the opposite party since the disputed bill pertain to the assessment of Electricity Act u/s 126 of the act, the consumer complaint is not maintainable. It is an admitted fact that complainant is challenging the electricity bill dated 14.2.2014 issued by the opposite party on the basis of the assessment u/s 126 of the Electricity Act, 2005. According to the complainant, since the house is rent out to nursing students there is no excess use of electricity. On going through the Ext.B4 the statement dated 19th February 2014 we came to see that complainant admitted before the opposite party at the time of hearing on 19.2.2014 that, “Medical College-” Complainant admitted in the complaint also that the house is rent out to nursing students. So it is clear from the admission made by the complainant that the building used for renting out to nursing students. The tariff of the hostel is LT VII A, with out of changing the tariff from domestic tariff to LT VII A, complainant was using the premises under the domestic tariff. According to the opposite party, since the electricity was being used unauthorizely a provisional penal assessment bill as per Section 126 of the Electricity Act amounting Rs.37,440/- has been served to the consumer under VII A tariff. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case UP Power Corporation Ltd. and another Vs. Anis Ahammed III 2013 KLT 55 (SC) 2013 III CPJ I (SC) held that, “Consumer complaint challenging electricity bills pertain to the unauthorized use and also assessment made u/s 126 of the Electricity Act are not maintainable.” In the instant case undisputedly, the complainant has challenged the additional bill which was issued by the opposite party on the basis of the assessment made u/s 126 of the Electricity Act.
7. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court, it is obvious that the complaint is not maintainable. As per Section 126(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003 “If the Assessing Officer reaches to the conclusion that unauthorized use of electricity has taken place the assessment shall be made for the entire period during which such unauthorized use of electricity has taken place and if, however in the period during which such unauthorized use of electricity has taken place cannot be ascertain such period shall be limited to a period of 12 months immediately preceding the date of inspection.” Opposite party admitted in the version that as per the request of the consumer, the tariff was changed from LT VII B to LT I A domestic tariff with effect from 27.02.2012. According to the complainant from 27.2.2012 onwards the building used for the commercial purpose was converted into domestic purpose and the house was used by the complainants. It is also admitted that he rented out the house to the nursing students on 25.9.2013. No evidence adduced by the opposite party that complainant rented out the building to the nursing students from 2012 onwards. Hence they have no right to issue a bill for the period from 03/12 to 01/14 as per Section 126 of the Electricity Act.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed with liberty to the complainant to approach before the proper Forum challenging the bill issued by the opposite parties.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me and
pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of April, 2016.
Sd/-Smt.Elizabeth George (President) :
Sd/-Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Sd/-Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Abdul Jabbar (Witness)
Ext.A1 - Bill for Rs.795/-
Ext.A2 - Ownership certificate
Ext.A3 - Letter dated 1.3.2014
Ext.A4 - Copy of the letter dated 31.1.2014
Ext.A5 - Letter dated 1.3.2014
Ext.A6 - True copy of the rented agreement dated 4.9.2014
Ext.A7 - Copy of the rented agreement dated 25.9.13
CW1 - Pradeepthy.S. (Witness)
Ext.C1 - Commission report
Evidence of the opposite party:-
RW1 - K.C. Sureshkumar (Witness)
RW2 - K. Suresh (Witness)
Ext.B1 - Copy of the site mahazor
Ext.B2 - Copy of the bill for Rs.37,440/- dated 23.1.2014
Ext.B3 - Copy of the letter dated 31.1.2014
Ext.B4 - Statement dated 19.2.2014
Ext.B5 - Copy of the bill for Rs.37,440/- dated 17.3.2014
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/- Compared by:-
