O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. The facts leading to this complaint are as follows :

The complainant is a consumer of electricity under the 2^nd opposite party. His consumer No. is 5469 under the LT VII A category. While so on 23-01-2008, an inspection was conducted by the opposite parties squad and on the basis of the said inspection a penalty of Rs. 3,000/- was imposed on the complainant alleging unauthorised extension of connected load. But after 2 years of the payment of the penalty, a bill dated 07-10-2010 for Rs. 17,332/- was issued to the complainant stating that as per the audit report dated 22-05-2010 the complainant is liable to pay the above said Rs. 17,332/- since he had paid the penal bill issued on 23-01-2008 for an authorised load and the load was regularized accordingly. The present demand raised by the opposite party is barred by limitation as per the Regulation 18 (8) of the Kerala Electricity Supply Code 2005. Thus, the complainant is before us to get the impugned bill set aside and also seeking direction against the opposite parties to pay the costs of the proceedings.

2. Version of the opposite parties :

The complainant availed the electric connection for a connected load of 700 watts for running a small shop. During the inspection without notice on 23-01-2008, it was found that one hotel and a cool bar were functioning and there was an unauthorised load of 3 KW. So the complainant was served with a penal bill for Rs. 3,600/- retrospectively for a period of 12 months. The complainant remitted the said amount. Later, the Regional Audit Wing noticed that the consumer was not penalized for continuing the unauthorised load. Accordingly so, he was served with a penal bill amounting to Rs. 17,332/- for the period from March 2008 to September 2009. The complainant is still enjoying the unauthorised load and is abstracting energy. So the complainant is liable to pay the amount as per the impugned bill.

3. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant and Exts. A1 and A2 were marked on his side. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the opposite party. Heard both sides.

4.The points that arose for consideration are :

i) Whether the complainant is entitled to get

the impugned bill set aside?

ii) Costs of the proceedings.

5. Point Nos. i) and ii) :- Admittedly, the Inter section Inspection squad of the 1^st opposite party visited the premises of the complainant on 23-01-2009 and directed the unauthorised load of 3 KW. The complainant was served with a penal bill amounting to Rs. 3,600/- retrospectively for a period of 12 months, that was remitted by the complainant. The impugned bill was issued by the opposite party alleging that still the complainant is enjoying the unauthorised load. Based on the audit report dated 22-05-2010 the bill was issued. Evidently, the present demand raised by the opposite party is clearly barred by limitation as per Regulation 18 (8) of the Kerala Electricity Supply Code 2005. Since the demand of the opposite party is beyond the period of limitation prescribed by the above Code, we are only to hold that the complainant is not liable to pay the amount as per the disputed bill.

6. In view of the above, we partly allow the complaint and order as follows :

1. we set aside Exts. A1 and A2 bills.

2. The order in the I.A. No. 108/2010 is varied and the complainant is directed to take steps to regularize the unauthorised connected load and the 2nd opposite party is to take appropriate action in accordance with the same in Law.

3. No order as to costs.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31^st day of May 2011.