SECRETARY KSEB,TVPM AND ORS Vs. UMMAR K H KOTHACHIRAPARAYIL, PAIPPADU, PALLICKACHIRA PO, KOTTAYAM
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Secretary Kseb,Tvpm And Ors
Ummar K H Kothachiraparayil, Paippadu, Pallickachira Po, Kottayam
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE appellant is the opposite party/KSEB in OP No. 448/02 in the file of CDRF, Kottayam. The appellants are under orders to pay compensation of Rs. 3,000/ -. The bill issued for Rs. 16,158/ - stands set aside. The above amount is ordered to be refunded with interest at 24% and also to pay costs of Rs. 750/ -.
(2.) THE case of the complainant is that he is an electrician as well as the office bearer of powrasamithy at the locality. As the powrasamithy used to question the illegal actions of the KSEB through various media, the staff of the KSEB was in inimical terms with him. He was consuming only an average of 100 units of electricity bimonthly and was paying bills regularly. As the petitioner found that the electric meter in his house is not working, on 05 -05 -2002 he reported the matter to the KSEB by recording the same in the complaint book. On 04 -07 -2002 also meter reading was taken by the opposite party. On 16 -07 -2002 a news item appeared in the Malayala Manorama Daily against the KSEB at the instance of the powrasamithy. On the same day, in the after noon a group of people including the Assistant Engineer went to the house of the petitioner and threatened his wife and destroyed the seal of his electric meter and declared that the meter was tampered. No mahazar was prepared. Assistant Engineer made the petitioner s wife to sign on a paper under threat. Subsequently, an invoice for Rs. 16,158/ - was issued. The connected load was calculated as 7 KW. The meter was removed and the electric supply cut off. The petitioner s wife pledged ornaments and raised the amounts and paid and only thereafter the electric supply was reconnected. Hence he has claimed the refund of the amount that was made to pay ie, Rs.16,158/ - with interest and also compensation.
(3.) IN the version filed the opposite parties/appellants have denied the entire allegations of the complainant. It is alleged that the complainant was undertaking electrical wiring works unauthorizely without a valid wiring license. It is denied that he recorded the complaint of nonworking of the meter in the complaint book. It is pointed out that the complaint book was missing from the office thereafter. The matter was reported to Sub Inspector of Police, Changanassery. It is stated that as a part of routine work, the Assistant Engineer conducted the inspection of certain premises including the house of the complainant and found that the meter has been tampered. A site mahazar was prepared which was signed by the wife of the complainant. There was also unauthorized connected load. The electric meter removed from the premises of the petitioner is being sent to the Electrical Inspectorate for testing. On receipt of notice, the wife of the complainant remitted the amount on the same day. The demand was made for misuse of electrical energy vide Clause 42(d) of the Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy.
The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PW1, DW1, Exts. A1 to A21 and B1 to B3.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.