DHARMODAYAM COMPANY Vs. ASSISTANT SECRETARY, ELECTRICITY DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR CORPORATION; THRISSUR CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Demand for payment of arrears of electricity charges, raised by the 2nd respondent against the petitioner company was challenged before the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Thrissur, in CC No.689/2005. The District Consumer Forum in its order dated 21-10-2010 allowed the complaint holding that the demand is unsustainable. An amount of Rs.30,000/- which was paid on the basis of an interim order was directed to be refunded. Aggrieved by order of the District Consumer Forum, the respondents filed appeal before the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. In Ext.P2 judgment the order of the District forum was reversed. Consequently the respondents have issued Ext.P3 demand directing payment of amounts due, within a period of 15 days, otherwise it is threatened that supply will be disconnected. Petitioner is challenging the demand now raised.

(2.) In view of the effective statutory remedy of appeal available under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act before the National Commission, the petitioner cannot challenge Ext.P2 before this Court. But it is pointed out that the National Commission was having holidays till 1st July, 2013 and therefore the petitioner could not seek appropriate remedy. In this regard Ext.P4 letter received from their lawyer at Delhi with whom the matter was entrusted, is produced. Under such circumstances the petitioner is seeking only a limited relief to direct the respondents to keep in abeyance coercive steps for disconnection of supply for a short period, in order to enable the petitioner to approach the National Commission and to seek stay against operation of Ext.P2 judgment.

(3.) Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that, even though the writ petition cannot be entertained on merits, an equitable relief can be granted in order to facilitate the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum.