CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
PALAKKAD, KERALA
Dated this the 24th day of July, 2012.
Present: Smt. Seena. H, President
: Smt. Preetha. G. Nair, Member
: Smt. Bhanumathi. A.K, Member Date of filing: 25/04/2012
CC / 80 / 2012
Manojkumar,
S/o.Sreekrishnan, Sreelakam, - Complainant
Karippali P.O, Pattancherry,
Chittur Taluk, Palakkad Dt.
(BY ADV. R.Gangadharan)
Vs
1. The Secretary,
Kerala State Electricity Board,
Vydyuthi Bhavan, Pattam, - Opposite parties
Thiruvananthapuram.
(BY ADV. T.Reena)
2. The Asst.Engineer,
Kerala State Electricity Board,
Thathamangalam, Palakkad.
(BY ADV. T.Reena)
O R D E R
BY SMT. PREETHA. G. NAIR, MEMBER
The complainant has availed electricity connection from the opposite parties and he is conducting service centre in the name and style of Akshaya E.Kendram from 2008 onwards. His consumer No is 5258. At the time of availing electric connection by the complainant the concerned officers were inspected the property and given connection. The complainant is using only 1 KW electricity. Initially the electric connection was taken by the building owner and subsequently the room was given on rent for running a computer centre and the owner of the computer centre was done all the electric fittings. After vacating the computer centre the complainant was taken the room for the purpose of conducting Akshaya E Kendram named eworld. The complainant is using only 6 numbers CFL bulbs having 25 watt and 10 plugs having 60 watt and 2 fans having 60 watt totaling 870 watt. He has deposited the C.D and making rent regularly. Now the electricity board is charging the tariff for electric supply to the complainant under the category LT VII (A)/VII (B) for commercial consumer. As per the electricity regulatory commission order all the Akshaya Kendra are eligible for the tariff under LT VI (B). Then the complainant filed application for the LT VI(B) category tariff on 7.7.2008 itself. But the opposite parties charging L.T.VII (A). On January 2012 the special squad attached to the opposite parties inspected the complainant's Akshaya E.Kendram and found that there was unauthorized use of electricity and load was calculated of 4395 watts. The opposite parties issued a provisional bill stating that the complainant has to make payment with regard to the using of unauthorized additional load. Then complainant filed an application to opposite parties stating true facts and reviewing the provisional bill. The opposite parties reviewed the bill and given a final bill showing an amount of Rs.26,645/-. It is absolutely false that the consumer has never consumed that much energy. Also the opposite parties have issued a notice demanding to additional deposit amount of Rs.3,207/- on 16/8/2011 and the amount paid by the complainant.
The provisional bill and final bill issued by the opposite parties are not legally maintainable. The acts of opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the complainant prays an order directing the opposite parties to
declare the bill dated 1/3/2012 is null and void and
Pay the cost of the proceedings.
Opposite parties filed version stating the following contentions. The consumer No.5258 under the commercial tariff was effected in the name of Smt.Vanaja and the date of connection was 22/12/1995 with a connected load of 220 watts in single phase line. The complainant stated that he is conducting service centre of Akshaya E.Kendram named eworld. But the complainant's name is not seen recorded anywhere in any manner. Initially the connection was obtained in VII (B) tariff and later it was changed to VII (A) tariff, and it continues to be so even now.
During the period of A.G audit in 2011-2012, the Sub Engineer conducted an inspection on 17/01/2012 and found unauthorized connected load of 4 KW in use of consumer No.5258. Based on the detection of unauthorized additional load assessment has been made and the provisional bill served to the complainant as per sec.126 of Electricity Act. On receipt of the bill the complainant filed objection before the assessing officer and hearing was conducted on 25/02/2012.
After hearing the provisional bill was revised and a final bill was prepared for an amount of Rs.26,645/- dated 01/03/2012, served to the complainant. All reasonable points raised by the complainant was considered for the preparations of the final bill. But the complainant not paid the bill amount and not approached the appellate authority. The opposite parties had acted only as per the relevant provisions of the Electricity Act. Even now the service connection is in the name of Smt.Vanaja and no name transfer has been effected in the name of Manojkumar.
In the order in IA 180/12 the electricity connection has been restored by the opposite parties.
Hence the opposite parties prayed that dismiss the complaint with cost.
Both parties filed their respective affidavits and documents. Ext.A1 to A11 marked on the side of complainant. Ext.B1 to B6 marked on the side of opposite parties. Matter heard.
Issues to be considered are
1). Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
2) If so what is the relief and cost?
Issue No:1 & II
Heard both parties and perused relevant documents on record. Ext.A1 shows that the complainant permitted to display Akshaya logo name board and to engage in Akshaya activities including e-literacy training. Ext.A2 dated 7/7/2008, the complainant requested the 2nd opposite party to change the tariff from VII (B) to VI(B) of consumer No.5258. The counsel of opposite parties argued that Ext.A2 document was not signed and not given to 2nd opposite party.
The complainant has not produced evidence to show that Ext.A2 letter given to 2nd opposite party. A copy of agreement attached to Ext.A2 shows that the complainant and Smt.Vanaja executed an agreement to conduct computer training and cable TV from 01/11/2011 to eleven months for an amount of Rs.2,500/- as rent per month, in her building.
The complainant stated that he availed electricity connection from the opposite parties and he is conducting service centre from 2008 onwards. But the complainant has not produced evidence to show that he is conducting service centre of Akshaya.E.Kendram from 2008 onwards. Moreover in Ext.A9 and Ext.A10 shows the name of the consumer was Smt.Vanaja. The complainant has filed objection to Ext.B2 bill dated 01/02/2012. After the hearing of complainant the opposite parties revised the provisional bill and served the final bill dated 1/3/2012.
In Ext.A5 the copy of order dated 1/09/2004 of Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission held that Akshaya centres should be charged tariff for power supply under category LT VI (B). The opposite parties has not produced evidence to show that the complainant has not conducted the service centre of Akshaya.E.Kendram. As per Ext.A1 and the agreement produced along with Ext.A2 shows that the complainant is conducting Akshaya.E.Kendram from 01/11/2011. Ext.A10 dated 01/02/2012 shows the penal F.C is 4 KW X Rs.50X12 months X 2 times. According to the complainant the opposite parties had issued a notice demanding to additional deposit amount of Rs.3,207/- on 16/8/2011 and paid by him. Further complainant stated that eventhough he is eligible for the LT VI(B) Tariff, the opposite parties went wrong in charging the tariff undr LT VII A. The opposite parties had not produced evidence to show that the complainant has consumed additional energy. Moreover the opposite parties had not produced the meter reading and the monthly bill of the consumer No.5258. In Ext.B1 the copy of the site mahazar mentioned that electricity was used in the Akshaya Centre. In Ext.A5 and Ext.A7 mentioned that LT VI(B) tariff applicable to computer training institutes. No contradictory evidence produced by the opposite parties.
As per Ext.A2 the complainant stated that the application to change the tariff given on 7/7/2008. But the complainant has not produced evidence to show that he conducted Akshaya.E.Kendram from 07/07/2008 and application given to opposite parties. On the available evidence we find that complainant conducted Akshaya.E.Kendram from 01/01/2011 onwards. The opposite parties has not produced contradictory evidence.
In the above discussions, we are of the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. In the result complaint allowed. We direct the opposite parties jointly and severally liable to cancel the bill dated 01/03/2012 for an amount of Rs.26,645/-/- (Rupees Twenty six thousand six hundred and forty five only) and pay Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of the proceeding. Opposite parties directed to change the electricity tariff to L.T.VI(B) category after the date of order. The order in IA 180/12 made absolute.
Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order failing which the whole amount shall carry 9% interest per annum from the date of order till realization.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 24th day of July, 2012.
Sd/-
Smt. Seena. H
President
Sd/-
Smt. Preetha.G.Nair
Member
Sd/-
Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K
Member
A P P E N D I X
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext. A1– Compliance Certificate of Akshaya District Project Office, Palakkad Dt.04/03/2008 (Photocopy)
Ext. A2- Letter to the Asst. Engineer, KSEB, Tattamangalam to change the Tariff from VII (B) to VI(B) of consumer No.5258 dt. 07/07/08(copy)
Ext. A3 - Copy of the proceedings of Asst.Engineer dt.01/03/2012
Ext. A4 - Copy of the objection filed by the complainant
Ext.A5- Interim Order dt.01/09/2004 from Regulatory Commission.(copy)
Ext.A6- Order of State Electricity Ombudsman (copy).
Ext.A7- Schedule of Tariff and Terms and conditions
Ext.A8- Proposals for rationalizing existing tariff structure.
Ext.A9- Final penal bill Rs.26,645/- dt.01/03/2012
Ext.A10- Provisional penal bill Rs.29,382/- dt.01/02/2012
Ext.A11- Site Mahazar dt.17/01/2012
Exhibits marked on the side of opposite parties
Ext.B1- Copy of Site Mahazar dt.17/1/2012
Ext.B2- Copy of provisional penal bill dt.1/2/2012
Ext.B3- Copy of the objection filed by the complainant
Ext.B4- Copy of the minutes of hearing
Ext.B5- Copy of the proceedings of Asst.Engineer.
Ext.B6- Copy of Final penal bill Rs.26,645/- dt.01/03/2012
Witness examined on the side of complainant
Nil
Witness examined on the side of opposite parties
Nil.
Cost allowed
Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) allowed as cost of the proceedings.
