SRI.K. VIJAYKUMARAN, PRESIDENT. This is a complaint for seeking to quash electricity bill, compensation and costs. The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows: The complainant is a consumer with consumer No,.17696 Electrical Major Section, Sasthamcotta. He has constructed new shop room for which electric connection was taken on 18.11.2004. Since there was no business the shop rooms remained closed. She is remitting the electricity charges regularly. The electric connection to the shop room is given directly from the transformer which situates about 20 feet away from the building. The complainant received electricity bills on 27.4.05 for Rs.481/- and thereafter on 27.6.05 for Rs.157/- and the charges as per which were remitted. On 5.8.05 she received a demand cum disconnection notice demanding Rs.15049/- showing that he has consumed 1814.4 units. The complaint’s shop room remains closed as there is no business and there is no chance for consuming such a huge quantity of electricity for the above shop. The fact that the shop is closed and there is no business is known to the opp.party also. It is understood that the exorbitant increase in the current charges is due to the drawing of electric connection directly from the transformer. This is due to deficiency in service. Hence the complaint. The opp.parties filed a joint version contending that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. It is true that the connection was provided to the complainant’s building on 18.11.2004 under commercial tariff. The connection is provided from the electric wires received from the transformer as in the case of all other consumers. The connection is not given directly from transformer as alleged. The consumer has remitted earlier 2 bills. While taking reading on 5.8.05 it was noticed that the consumer has consumed 1814 units of electricity for which bill for Rs.15049/- was issued. Since exorbitant increase in reading has been noticed the meter reader reported the same to the office and the line man and Sub Engineer inspected the meter. On inspection nothing abnormally was noticed in the meter. On inspection of the main switch it was found that the exorbitant consumption was due to the defect in the main switch. A mahazar was also prepared. On inspection it was noticed that the fuse wire from the main switch has lost insulation to a considerable length, with the result that the wire was in contact with the cover of main switch and thereby electricity is being lost. This happened due to the negligence on the part of the consumer for which the opp.parties are not responsible. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties. Hence opp.parties prays to dismiss the complaint Points that would arise for consideration are: 1. Whether Ext.P1 bill is liable to be quashed? 2. Whether there is deficiency in deficiency in the service on the part of the opp.parties? 3. 2. Reliefs and costs. For the complainant PWs.1 and 3 are examined. Ext.P1 to P5 are marked For the opp.parties DWs.1 and 2 are marked. Ext. D1 is marked. POINTS; There is no dispute the complainant has constructed a new shop room wherein electric connection was provided under commercial tariff on 18.11.2004 and that the building remains closed as there is no business being carried on. After installation of electric connection 3 bills were issued to the consumer . The grievances of the complaint is that in Ext.P1 which is the 3rd bill issued after installation an exorbitant amount is demanded while the earlier 2 bills were for much lesser amounts. According to the complainant the issuing of Ext.P1 in respect of a building wherein no business is carried on is deficiency in service. According to the opp.party they inspected the building and the premises with the report of the meter reader when exorbitant increase in the consumption of electricity was noticed. On inspection the meter was found working properly and no signs of any tampering was noticed. Therefore they have inspected the switch board and it was noticed that the insulation of the phase wire to some length was found missing and the phase wire touching the cover of the main switch causing leakage of electricity which is the reason for the exorbitant reading. They have also prepared Ext. D1 mahazaar. The electric connections are provided to consumers by the KSE Board after inspection and satisfying with the wiring which is certified by a licensed electrician. The complainant here in is a layman having no knowledge about these aspects. The opp.parties have no case that the defect in the phase wire is caused by the complainant. It is the case of the opp.party that the wiring and the switch board are the responsibility of the consumer and their duty ends with the electric meter. In our view before giving the connection the opp.party has a duty to inspect the main switch which is also an integral part of the connection before providing connection. It is a case wherein an innocent consumer who is not even using the premises has been penalized for no fault of his which is not just or proper. In the peculiar nature of this case even if no deficiency in service can be attributed on the opp.parties we are inclined to quash Ext.P1 bill. Points found accordingly. In the result complaint is allowed in part, directing the opp.party to issue fresh bill for Ext.P1 taking average of previous bills. No costs Dated this the 30th day of November, 2009. I N D E X List of witnesses for the complainant PW.1. – Narayana Pillai PW.2.- Biju Kumar PW.3. – Vidya Suresh List of documents for the complainant P1. – Authorisation letter P2. – Bill for Rs.481/- dated 27.4.05 P3. – Demand and Disconnection Notice P4. – Bill for Rs.159/- P5. – Demand and Disconnection notice C1. – Commission report List of witnesses for the opp.parties DW.1. - R. Madana Mohanan Pillai DW.2. – Baiju.G List of documents for the opp.parties D1. – Site Mahazar | 
