C CHANNAIAH Vs. SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER KARNATAKA ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this complaint, under Sec.12 r/w Sec.17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 , the complainant has sought compensation in a sum of Rs.9,30,000/- from the opposite party Karnataka Electricity Board.

(2.) It is the case of the complainant that he had set up a rice mill on obtaining a loan of Rs.5.77 lakhs from the Karnataka State Finance Corporation. The opposite party, though sanctioned the power in favour of the complainant's rice mill on 7.5.90, but it serviced the installation only on 13.5.91 and so he was made to keep the mill idle for a period of one year. The complainant, on the basis of these averments, sought compensation for the loss that is sustained in keeping the mill idle for a period of one year.

(3.) The complainant, further averred that, the opposite party sanctioned the power to the complainant with a restriction to work only between 10.00 p. m. and 6.00 a. m. The complainant averred that this was an arbitrary and discriminatory order made by the opposite party-KEB and in consequence of which the complainant had suffered a loss. The complainant, on the basis of these averments, sought compensation from the opposite party in a sum of Rs.9,30,000/-.