KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL NO.395/06

JUDGMENT DATED 28.2.2011

PRESENT

SHRI.M.V.VISWANATHAN                     --  JUDICIAL MEMBER

SHRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA                    --  MEMBER                                                                          

1.      The Secretary,

Kerala State Electricity Board,

Vaithuthi Bhavan,

Thiruvananthapuram.

2.      Assistant Engineer,                         --  APPELLANTS

          Anti Power Theft Squad

          KSEB, Kalpetta, Wayanad.

3.      Assistant Engineer,

KSEB, Electrival Section,

Meenangadi.

            (By Adv.B.Sakthidharan Nair)

                   Vs.

P.V.Narayanan,

S/0 Velappa, Poongattu Veedu,

Anapara, Chulliyode P.O,                         --  RESPONDENT

Nenmeni Amsom Desom

Sulthan Bathery Taluk

Wayanad.

    (By Adv.Shibi.K.P)

JUDGMENT

SHRI.M.V.VISWANATHAN,JUDICIAL MEMBER

          The above appeal is directed against the order dated 31^st October 2005 of the CDRF, Wayanad, Kalpetta in OP.No.101/04.  The complaint in the said OP.101/04 was filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in issuing penal bills for Rs.13,761/- and Rs.30,963/-.    Thereby, the complainant prayed for setting aside the impugned penal bills.

          2. The third opposite party/Asst.Engineer, KSEB; Electrical Section, Meenangadi filed written version denying the alleged deficiency in service.  It was contended that the penal bills were issued based on the surprise inspection conducted by the Anti Power Theft Squad and in the said inspection misuse of energy was detected.  Thus, the third opposite party justified the action of KSEB in issuing the impugned penal bills. 

          3. Before the Forum below, the complainant filed proof affidavit.  Exts.A1 to A6 documents and C1 and C2 reports were marked on the side of the complainant.  No evidence was adduced from the side of the opposite parties.  Based on the unchallenged and un-controverted evidence of the complainant, the Forum below passed the impugned order dated 31.10.05 cancelling the impugned penal bills with a direction to refund the amount of Rs.10,000/- remitted by the complainant/consumer during the pendency of the complaint in OP.101/04.   Aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal is filed by the opposite parties therein.

          4. When this appeal was taken up for final hearing, there was no representation for the respondent/complainant.  We heard the learned counsel for the appellants/opposite parties.  He submitted his arguments based on the grounds urged in the memorandum of the present appeal and argued for the position that there was misuse of electrical energy by the respondent/complainant (consumer) and so the KSEB is justified in issuing the penal bills.  

          5. There is no dispute that the respondent/complainant is a consumer under KSEB and that the complainant/consumer is having two electricity connections with Con.Nos.6807 and 8202.  Admittedly, the Con.No.6807 is a domestic connection and Con.No.8202 is an agricultural electricity connection.  There is no case for the appellant/opposite party KSEB that the complainant/consumer is a defaulter of electricity charges.

          6. The definite case of the appellants/opposite parties (KSEB) is that the respondent/complainant (consumer) misused electrical energy by consuming the electricity supplied for domestic and agricultural purpose for the construction of a new house.    Further case of the appellants that the alleged misuse of energy was detected by the Anti Power Theft Squad in the surprise inspection conducted on 9.6.03.  But the respondent/compla