KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL.609/09JUDGMENT DATED: 18.1.2010PRESENT JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER Thrissur Corporation, : APPELLANT Represented by its Secretary, Thrissur Corporation, Thrissur. (By Adv.B.Vasudevan Nair) vs. 1. Sudhan, S/o Nanu, : RESPONDENTS Kunnathully Pulikkan House, Puthurkkara, Thrissur. 2. Asst.Engineer, KSEB, Ayyanthole Electrical Section, Olirikkara, Pullazhi, Thrissur. 3. KSEB, Thiruvananthpauram, rep.by its Secretary. (By Adv.V.S.Vineethkumar, counsel for R2 & R3) JUDGMENT JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellant is the 3rd opposite party in CC 454/2007 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur. The appellant is under orders to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 12%. 2. The complainant is an occupier of the room owned by the appellant for the monthly license fee of Rs.1551/- from 19.4.2006. As against the assurance of the opposite parties it was found that there is no power supply. It was learnt that the previous owner left with the arrears of Rs.11,130/- to the electricity Board. He is not in a position to get new electricity supply without clearing the arrears. 3. The 1st and 2nd opposite party/KSEB had contended that the electricity connection was disconnected and dismantled as the previous occupier did not pay electricity charges. As per rules for giving fresh connection the previous arrears has to be paid. 4. The appellant/3rd opposite party has filed version contenting that as per the terms and conditions of quotation notice the licensee has to bear the expenses of the water and electricity; and the necessary certificate has been issued. 5. The evidence adduced consisted of Ext.P1 to P3. 6. It is the contention of the appellant that the default is on the part of opposite parties 1 and 2/KSEB as they have not taken proper steps to realize the arrears of electricity charges and also not intimated the appellant as to the existing arrears. We find that appellant has not adduced any evidence before the Forum as to the terms of the quotation notice etc, and the terms of the same as contended by the appellant has not been proved before the Forum. Evidently there is deficiency in service on the part of the appellant, as the appellant ought to have intimated the fact of lack of electricity supply of the particular room where the same was entrusted to the complainant. In the circumstances we find there is no scope for admitting the appeal. In the result the appeal is dismissed in limine. Office is directed to forward the copy of this order to the Forum urgently. JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER ps | 
