BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

O.P. No. 113/2001 Filed on 07.03.2001

Dated : 28.02.2009

Complainant:

K. Divakaran Nair, T.C 8/1088-1, Erathttukonam, Valiavila, Thirumala P.O, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. Amaravila P. Venugopalan Nair)

Opposite parties:

1. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Major Section, KSEB, Thirumala P.O, Thirumala.

    

2. The Secretary, KSEB, Vaidyuthi Bhavan, Thiruvananthapuram representing the KSEB.

    

(By adv. K.P. Renadive)

This complaint is disposed of after the period so specified under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Though the case was taken up for orders by the predecessors of this Forum on 29.08.2003, the order was not prepared accordingly. This Forum assumed office on 08.02.2008 and re-heard the complaint. This O.P having been heard on 30.01.2009, the Forum on 28.02.2009 delivered the following:

ORDER

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD: PRESIDENT

The facts leading to the filing of the complaint are that the complainant is a consumer of opposite parties vide consumer No. 8016, that in the month of January 2001, the employees of the opposite parties came to the house of the complainant and removed the electricity meter, the fuse etc. on the direction of the 1^st opposite party without any notice of prior intimation to the complainant, that there was no disconnection of electricity to the house of the complainant prior to its dismantling by the opposite party, that complainant had remitted all the arrears up to 27.07.1998 and that no notice under Sec. 24 of the Indian Electricity Act was issued to the complainant by the opposite parties before dismantling the electric connection. On 14.02.2000, the 1^st opposite party had informed the complainant that the electric connection to consumer No. 8016 has been dismantled and that the RR proceedings would be resorted to realize the arrears and other departmental expenses from the complainant. There is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint to grant electric connection to the complainant without insisting formalities for fresh connection, to withdraw the RR proceedings initiated to realize the arrears and to pay compensation and costs.

Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version contending that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The connection was dismantled 1½ years back and as such there is no contractual or supplier-consumer relationship between the opposite parties and the complainant, that complainant has no locus standi to file this complaint, that consumer was a defaulter of current charges right from the very inception of effecting service connection, that cosumer had cleared dues towards current charges from 03/92 to 06/97 only on 27.07.1998, that thereafter complainant failed to clear the dues towards the opposite parties and after forewarning, the service connection was disconnected. Even after disconnection complainant refused to honour the dues and hence a notice dated 30.09.1999 was issued to the consumer asking him to clear off the dues to the Board on or before 22.10.1999, failing which the service connection will be dismantled. Later the complainant approached before the Adalath conducted by the opposite party and opposite party rejected his claim as opposite parties had acted as per regulations. There is no deficiency of service and hence opposite parties prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

The points that arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether there has been deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

2. Reliefs and costs.

In support of the complaint, complainant has filed affidavit and Exts. P1 to P7 were marked. In rebuttal, 1^st opposite party has filed affidavit and Exts. D1 to D6 were marked.

Points (i) & (ii):- Admittedly complainant is a consumer of opposite parties vide consumer No. 8016. It has been the case of the complainant that in the month of January 2001, certain employees of the opposite parties came to the house of the complainant and removed the electricity meter, the fuses etc. on the direction of the 1^st opposite party without notice or prior intimation to the complainant, that there was no disconnection of electricity to the complainant prior to its dismantling by the opposite parties and that it was out of the personal enmity nurtured by some employees at the KSEB Section, Thirumala, that the electric connection was dismantled in unlawful manner. It has been rebutted by the opposite parties by submitting that complainant/consumer was a defaulter of current charges right from the very inception of effecting service connection, that this complainant had cleared dues towards current charges from 03/92 to 06/97 only on 27.07.1998, that thereafter also complainant failed to clear dues, that after forewarning the complainant, the service connection was disconnected, and that even after the disconnection, complainant refused to honour the dues and hence as per regulations a notice to dismantle the service was issued to the consumer. Ext. P1 is the notice dated 14.02.2000 prior to RR proceedings issued to the complainant by the 1^st opposite party. As per Exts. P1, complainant was directed to contact the office of the opposite parties on or before 25.02.2000. Ext. P1(a) is the letter issued by 1^st opposite party to the complainant. Ext. P3 is the adjustment invoice dated 08.07.1998 issued by the opposite party. Ext. P4 is the receipt dated 27.07.1998 for Rs. 279/-. Ext. P5 is the bill dated 18.09.1999 for Rs. 73/-. Ext. P6 is the bill dated 16.11.1999 for Rs. 53/-. Ext. P7 is the copy of the application filed before the Adalath. Main thrust of argument advanced by the opposite parties was to the effect that even after disconnection, complainant refused to honour the dues and hence a notice to dismantle the service was issued to the consumer as per Regulations. Ext. D1 is the copy of the said notice dated 30.09.1999. It is stated as per Ext. D1 that consumer had defaulted in payment of current charges for more than six months, that consumer was directed to clear off the dues on or before 22.10.1999 in order to restore service connection, failing which, service will be dismantled and RR proceedings will be initiated to recover the said dues with interest thereon. Ext. D2 is the copy of Ext. P1. As per Ext. D2 complainant was informed of arrear amount prior to RR action and complainant was asked to contact to opposite parties' office before 25.02.2000. As per Regulations relating to Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy, if the consumer fails to pay invoice/card issued to him on or before the due date the Board shall be at liberty to take action under Sub Sec. (1) of Sec. 24 of the Indian Electricity Act and to cut off the supply giving such consumer not less than seven clear day's notice in writing without prejudice to the Board's right to recover the amount of the bill by suit or otherwise. When however any difference or dispute has been referred under the Act to the Electrical Inspector before notice as aforesaid has been given by the Board, the Board shall not be at liberty to cut off the supply for failure to pay the bill except when the Board has made the request in writing to the consumer that the amount in dispute should be deposited with the Electrical Inspector and the consumer has failed to comply with that request and the Electrical Inspector gives his opinion thereon. If a consumer fails to remit the charges before the expiry of the seven clear days shown in the 'disconnection notice', the service will be disconnected without further notice on the next working day. Submission by the complainant is that in the month of January 2001, employees of the Board came to the house of the complainant and removed the electricity and that no notice under Sec. 24 of the I.E Act was issued to the complainant by the opposite parties before dismantling electric connection. In his examination, DW1 deposed that disconnection notice was issued to the complainant as D1 and D2. In his cross examination DW1 replied that the said notice was issued on 30.09.1999. In Ext. D1, it is stated that complainant had made default in payment of current charges for more than six months and that complainant was directed to clear off dues on or before 22.10.1999 in order to restore service connection, that means the service connection had already disconnected by opposite parties prior to notice dated 30.09.1999. Opposite parties did not file any document showing the issuance of disconnection notice to the complainant prior to the date of disconnection. As per Ext. P5 bill dated 18.09.1999, opposite parties claimed an amount of Rs. 73/- from the consumer, the last date of payment without fine is 25.09.1999 and the last date of payment to avoid disconnection is 07.10.1999. As per Ext. D1 dated 30.09.1999 the service connection is seen disconnected prior to 30.09.1999. In view of the aforesaid, we find the disconnection of service connection by the opposite parties was against the provisions of Regulations relating to Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy and Indian Electricity Act and hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Taking into consideration of totality of circumstances we think justice will be well met if the service connection is granted to the complainant without insisting the formalities for fresh connection.

In the result complaint is partly allowed. Opposite parties shall restore the electric connection to consumer No. 8016 without insisting the formalities for fresh connection. There will be no compensation and cost in facts and circumstances of the case. Opposite parties are at liberty to recover the arrear amount from the complainant as per provision of Regulation relating to Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the day of 28^th February 2009.

G. SIVAPRASAD,

President.

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

O.P. No. 113/2001

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

NIL

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Letter dated 14.02.2000 issued to the complainant by the opposite party.

P1(a) - Letter dated 05.01.2001 issued to the complainant by the opposite party.

P2 - Letter dated 19.05.1998 issued to the opposite party by the complainant.

P3 - Adjustment invoice No. 25695 dated 08.07.1998 issued from Electrical Major Section, Thirumala.

P4 - Receipt of bill of Rs. 279/-.

P5 - Demand and disconnection notice dated 18.09.1999.

P6 - Demand and disconnection notice dated 16.11.1999.

P7 - Copy of letter dated 26.06.2000 issued by the complainant to the opposite party.

III OPPOSITE PARTIES' WITNESS :

DW1 - Nizamudeen. K

IV OPPOSITE PARTIES' DOCUMENTS :

D1 - Copy of notice dated 30.09.1999 issued by opposite party to the complainant.

D2 - Copy of letter dated 14.02.2000 issued by the opposite party to the complainant.

D3 - Copy of letter No. MB17/2000-01/TMLA/21.08.2000 issued by opposite party to the complainant.

D4 - Copy of letter dated 05.01.2001 issued to the complainant by the opposite party

D5 - Copy of demand and disconnection notice dated 17.05.1999.

D6 - Copy of note written by Assistant Executive Engineer.

PRESIDENT