By Sri. MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
1.The complaint in short is as follows: -
The complainant is a domestic consumer under the opposite party and his consumer number is 1167365006154. The submission of complainant is that the opposite party has to record his electricity consumption on 01/10/2018, but they recorded the electricity consumption only on 03/10/2018. Due to delay of two days caused in recording the meter reading there was excess unit consumption was recorded by the opposite party and thereby the complainant lost subsidy benefit and also compelled to pay excess current charges. The submission of the complainant is that consumer is entitled for subsidy when the consumption is below 240 units, but due to the delayed recording of consumption of current, it was recorded more than 240 units i.e. 248 and thereby the complainant lost subsidy benefit. Due to defective service complainant contacted the opposite party with complaint several times, but there was no reply from the opposite party. Later on, 11/10/2018 complainant filed complaint before the opposite party, even then there was no proper response from the opposite party. The submission of complainant is that his meter reading was recorded on 02/10/2018 and then 60 days completes on 01/10/2018. But the opposite party recorded meter reading only on 03/10/2018 and so there is delay of two days. Due to the delay in recording meter reading the complainant lost subsidy benefit and also due to change of slab he was compelled to pay additional amount of Rs. 436/-. Complainant availed leave and spent lot of time to approach the opposite party with the grievance. Hence the complainant prays for the compensation of Rs 15,000/-, cost of Rs 10,000/-, and other expenses as Rs.5,000/-, he claims a total amount of Rs.30,436/- .
2. On admission of complaint notice was issued to the opposite party and on receipt of notice opposite party entered appearance and filed version. The opposite party denied the entire averments and allegations in the complaint.
3. The opposite party admitted that the complainant is a domestic consumer under the opposite party before the electrical section Thanaloor. The connection was issued to the complainant 29/08/2001 and since he is consuming electricity and making payment of electricity bill also. During the month 2018 August/September the complainant filed a complaint regarding the meter reading and the opposite party duly considered his complaint and found without any merit. The opposite party serving electricity bill as per Kerala Electricity Supply Code 2014- Chapter 1, Regulation 2, Sub Regulation 17,18 and as per regulation the electricity reading to be recorded not later than 3 days of the billing period. So, in this complaint there was no latches from the opposite party.
4. The opposite party admitted the usual billing period is two months. But during February/March it is 31+28=59/60 days and during July/August it is 31+31=62 days and some other period it is 60 days. During holidays regularising in accordance with walking order is also necessitated. As per walking order the reading of October month has to take on third working day. The September 30th was Sunday and October 2nd was Gandhi Jayanthi holiday. The third day itself meter reading was recorded. Some occasions one or two days delay naturally occurs. There is no nexus with the consumption of electricity by the complainant. If at all any considerable delay occurs in recording meter reading, then it will be adjusted with the next reading. There was no considerable variation in meter reading of the complainant during the relevant period compeered with other reading. The reading of the complainant recorded regularly. The opposite party also submitted that the difference in preceding reading will be considered in succeeding reading and so there will not be loss to the complainant considering annual average as such. The opposite party submitted the meter reading chart of the complainant from 12/2017 to 12/2018 i.e., 12/2017=238, 02/2018=231, 04/2018=251, 06/18= 236, 08/2018=207, 10/2018=248, 12/2018=236. In the light of the above facts, the opposite party submitted that the average reading of the complainant per day is 4 units and if one day average consumption is reduced from the total units, the consumption of current by the complainant crosses the subsidy boarder. It is also submitted that the complainant had crossed the subsidy limits earlier occasion also. The opposite party submitted that the reason for loosing subsidy is not due to delay in meter reading but increase in the consumption of electricity. The opposite party submitted that the complaint filed by the complainant, only to harass the opposite party and there is no merit in the complaint and liable to be dismissed with cost of the opposite party.
5. The complainant and opposite party submitted affidavit and documents. The documents on the side of complainant marked as Ext. A1to A3 and document of opposite party marked as Ext. B1. Ext.A1 is cash receipts dated 11/10/2018 and 15/12/2018. Ext.A2 is copy of reply issued by opposite party to the complainant. Ext. A3 is copy of petition submitted by complainant before the opposite party. Ext. B1 is copy of consumer profile of complainant.
6. Heard complainant and opposite party, perused affidavit and documents. The following points arise for consideration: -
1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
2. Relief and cost?
7.Points No: 1& 2:-
The grievance of complainant is that due to delay in recording meter reading, the
complainant lost subsidy benefit and he was also constrained to pay excess bill. The complaint produced A1 to A3 documents in support of his case. But these documents do not substantiate the case of complainant. But the opposite part admitted that the meter reading was taken on 3rd working day since the September 30th was Sunday and October second being Gandhi Jayanthi holiday. Hence according to opposite party there was no delay as alleged by the complainant. Moreover, the average consumption of the complainant is 4 unit per day and the delay of one day is not the reason for loss of subsidy to the complainant. Opposite party also submitted chart of consumption of electricity by the complainant which also reveals that the complainant had consumed more units than Subsidy limit. The opposite party also submitted that it is usual to have occasions of delay of few days and it will be considered properly. In this complaint the delay is not a considerable period and cause for loosing subsidy benefit is also not due to delay in meter reading, considering the principle of average consumption. Hence, considering the entire evidence we find that there is no sufficient reason to allow the complaint and we dismiss this complaint.
Dated this day of 17thday of October, 2022.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A3
Ext.A1 : Cash receipts dated 11/10/2018and 15/12/2018.
Ext.A2 :Copy of reply issued by opposite party to the complainant.
Ext. A3 : Copy of petition submitted by complainant before the opposite party.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Ext. B1
Ext. B1 : Copy of consumer profile of complainant.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
