SECRETARY KSEB Vs. M R SUGATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Opposite parties in O. P.56/1999 on the file of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Alappuzha is the appellant. The complainant challenged Exbts. P1 and P2 bills issued by the opposite party maintaining that though he had applied for changing the tariff from construction purpose to domestic purpose, the opposite party issued the aforesaid two bills stating that he consumed energy in excess, he seeks to maintain that he is not liable. In the version by the opposite party they contended, the connection was given to the complainant on 1.4.1994 under L. T. VII-A for the construction of the house in the name of Smt. Santhamma Sugathan. On 22.2.1995 he applied for fixing the meter to the new building and accordingly the meter was fixed in the new building. Complainant got himself examined as P. W.1 and he produced Exbts. P1 to P4. The District Forum on a consideration of the said evidence declared that the amount in Exbt. P1 prior to six months of its issue is quashed and also made a direction that if any amount is paid that must be adjusted against the amount found to be due. The said direction is challenged in this appeal.

(2.) It is submitted by the learned Counsel that inasmuch as there is no case for the complainant that the meter was faulty, the District Forum could not have restricted the right of the opposite party to collect the charges for the energy consumed for six months only. It is submitted by the learned Counsel that as a matter of fact Exbts. P1 and P2 bills were issued for the energy actually consumed by the complainant. In such circumstance the quashing of the bill for the period more than six months cannot be upheld. If consolidated bill issued for a period beyond six months that may amount to deficiency of service but that cannot be a ground to the quash any part of the said bill; if at all, in such a case the complainant would be eligible only to pay the amounts in instalments. When such is the position we cannot uphold the direction made by the District Forum. The appeal has to be allowed and the complaint is liable to be dismissed. In the result the appeal is allowed, however there will be no order as to costs.