Kerala

Malappuram

OP/03/97

E.M KUNHIMUHAMMED, IRUVALLI THERIYATH HOUSE - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE ASST. ENGINEER, KSEB - Opp.Party(s)

P.P BALAKRISHNAN

08 Feb 2008

ORDER


DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
MALAPPURAM
consumer case(CC) No. OP/03/97

E.M KUNHIMUHAMMED, IRUVALLI THERIYATH HOUSE
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

THE ASST. ENGINEER, KSEB
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI 2. K.T. SIDHIQ

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

ORDER

By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President, 1. Complainant prays for cancellation of the electricity bill dated, 13-09-02 for Rs.41,040/- served on him by opposite party alleged due to unauthorised additional load. 2. Opposite party filed version stating that complainant has an agricultural connection vide consumer No.10057 (3 phase) and domestic connection vide consumer No.163 (single phase). Complainant was issued the invoice for unauthorised additional extension as per inspection conducted on 12-9-2002. The load detected at domestic connection was 6400 watts. The energy extracted from agricultural connection was fed to above domestic connection and the outlet goes to the godown. The bill is issued as per rules and complainant is liable to pay the same. 3. Evidence consists of the affidavit filed by complainant and Exts.A1 to A3 marked on his behalf. Ext.B1 marked on the side of opposite party. Although complainant disputes the unauthorised additional load he has not adduced any reliable evidence to prove his case. Ext.B1 is the meter reading register of both the consumer numbers which proves the case of opposite party. The bill has been issued levying penalty three times. Admittedly complainant has paid 1/3rd of the amount. The penalty at present is only 1.5 times and therefore complainant is entitled to pay only the same. 4. In the result, complaint allowed. Ext.A1 bill dated, 13-9-2002 for Rs.41,040/- stands cancelled. Opposite party is ordered to issue revised bill by imposing penalty asper rules prevailing at present. The amount already paid by complainant has to be considered and deducted in the revised bill. The time limit for compliance of the order is fixed as two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Dated this 8th day of February, 2008. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT K.T.SIDHIQ, MEMBER APPENDIX Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A3 Ext.A1 : Photo copy of the bill dated, 13-9-2002 for Rs.41,040/- issued by opposite party to complainant. Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the receipt for Rs.442/- issued by opposite party to complainant. Ext.A3 : Bill dated, 5-9-2002 for Rs.442/- issued by opposite party to complainant Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1 Ext.B1 : Photo copy of the meter reading extract relating to consumer No.63. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT K.T.SIDHIQ, MEMBER




......................C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI
......................K.T. SIDHIQ