Kerala

Kottayam

CC/09/96

Manjusha Sabu - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Assistant Engineer - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.Sudev Kumar

30 Mar 2010

ORDER


KottayamConsumer Disputes Redressal Forum,Civil Station, Kottayam
CONSUMER CASE NO. 09 of 96
1. Manjusha SabuMuruppel House,Thalappalam,Kalathukkadavu P.O.Kerala ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. The Assistant EngineerK.S.E.B,Electrical Section,Pala.Kerala ...........Respondent(s)


For the Appellant :
For the Respondent :

Dated : 30 Mar 2010
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM
Present:
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President
Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member
CC. No.96/2009
Tuesday, the 30th day of March, 2010.
Petitioner                                              :           Manjusha Sabu
                                                                        Muruppel House,
Thalappalam
Kalathukadavu P.O .
                                                                        (By Adv. R. Sudevkumar)
 
Opposite parties                                   :   1)     The KSEB,
Vaidyuthi Bhavan,
Thiruvananthapuram.
Reptd by its Secretary.
 
2)          The Asst. Exe. Engineer,
KSEB, Electrical Section,
Pala.
 
O R D E R
 
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President.
 
            Heard both sides. Here the assessment of the petitioner is under Section 126 (3) of Electricity Act 2003. As per Section 127 (2) of the Electricity Act. Petitioner is legally bound to remit ½ of the assessed amount with the licensee to file an appeal to the appellate authority or to file a petition before Fora.
 
            Here the petitioner has not deposited ½ of the assessed amount before the Fora. So, the petition is dismissed. Taking a linent view we allow the petitioner to deposit the assessed amount in 5 equal monthly installments.
 
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/-    
Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member                    Sd/-
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member                    Sd/-
 
                                                                                                By Order,
 
 
                                                                                    Senior Superintendent.
 
amp/ 5 cs.

HONORABLE Bindhu M Thomas, MemberHONORABLE Santhosh Kesava Nath P, PRESIDENTHONORABLE K.N Radhakrishnan, Member