IN THE KODAGU DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MADIKERI

ORDER DELIVERED BY HON’BLE MEMBER                           SMT. C.RENUKAMBA

1. This complaint under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 seeking direction to the opposite party is  restricted from collecting electricity bill, forfeiting the deposit of Rs.15,700/- and also from disconnecting ¤ÃgÁªÀj (IP SET) KNIP-77457 and all such other charges which will be incurred in the consequence of this complaint.

2. The brief facts of the case that the complainant is the resident of cause title address and having agricultural properties inherited after his father death on 28.6.2018 along with mother and family members, later on 15/03/2019 vide registered document No.707/18-19 in favour of the complainant.  Since from then the complainant became the sole right holder to the properties of his deceased father namely M.J. Basavaraju.  For the better development of the properties the father of the complainant during his life time applied an application for electricity for the submersible 5HP bore well.  But unfortunately, the father of complainant died and the said fact is intimated to the opposite orally by the successors of complainant father including complainant.

3. That due to latches in Revenue documents nor complainant or successors of complainant father could not fallow up the application and for the perfect of title since the complainant is only the male issue in the family of successors of complainant family and accordingly the other members executed a release deed as mentioned supra in favour of complainant.

4. It is submitted that, one neighboring person namely Madhu Kumar, who is jealous with the hard worked improvement of complainant.  He one or the other way trying to curtail the development of the complainant, who actually at the time of filing the application for electricity in regard to bore well took initiative with the complainant father.

5. That the above said person not only troubling the complainant in this aspect, but in totality in all the complainant personal and development activities.  Fed up with his attitude the complainant filed a caveat before the respective Hon’ble Court to not to trouble me in any aspect and the caveat is numbered as 6/2020.

6. That the complainant is innocent and it is now the peak time and it the electricity is disconnected the entire family of the complainant will come to street.  Hence the complainant is a consumer of the electricity for his day today needs and if the letter issued by the opposite party on the complaint by Madhu Kumar bearing No.¸ÀPÁ¤EA/ ¸À.EA/PÀÄ.£À/19-20/6412-15 dated 17-3-2020 is to be restricted and natural justice is to be upholded by this Hon’ble Forum, since the entire act is due under the supervision of the opposite party and after all documentary perfectivity the electricity supply provided by the opposite party.  Moreover after receiving the letter the complainant contacted the opposite party leaving behind all his scheduled work, but no issues sought out. Apart from that due to the pressure of Madhu Kumar there are every chances collecting electricity bill and forfeiture of deposit of a amount of Rs.15,700/- and together with that disconnection of electricity as per letter bearing No.¸ÀPÁ¤EA/ ¸À.EA/PÀÄ.£À/19-20/6412-15 dated 17-3-2020 issued by the  opposite party pertaining to ¤ÃgÁªÀj (IP SET) KNIP-77457 belonging to complainant.

7. The cause of action arose on 17-3-2020, when the complainant was intimated with a letter bearing No. .¸ÀPÁ¤EA/ ¸À.EA/PÀÄ.£À/19-20/6412-15 dated 17-3-2020 for disconnection and recovery and forfeiture of deposit amount of Rs.15,700/- and all the subsequent dates from thereon.

8. In this case complainant filed his examination-in-chief by way of affidavit evidence as CW-1 with documents marked as exhibit C-1 to C-7.

9. Opposite parties inspite of service of notice remained absent and therefore they are set ex-parte.

10. The points that would arise for our consideration are as under;
    1. Whether the complainant proves the deficiency in service by the opposite parties and thereby he is entitled for the reliefs sought ?
    2. What order ?

11. Our findings on the above points are as under;
    1. Point No.1 :-Partly in the Affirmative
    2. Point No.2:- As per the final order for the        

following ;

R E A S O N S

12. Point No.1:- Complainant’s father has expired on 28/06/2018 as per the documents submitted.  Complainant’s father had taken electricity connection for agriculture through proper channel and as per the rules laid by the electricity board.  Later, it is seen that, after the death of complainant’s father, complainant has requested to transfer electricity connection in his name, but the electricity board has neglected his request, and have disconnected the electricity connection without any notice.  Every person needs electricity either for agriculture or for residential plots or layouts,  but, in this instant case, the electricity board would have verified all documents and intimated the complainant about the fee structure before disconnection.  Opposite party the electricity board, had disconnected the electricity stating that the complainant has furnished false information, but without giving opportunity to the complainant opposite party has disconnected the electricity which is against natural justice.

13. Before disconnection of electricity, opposite party would have conducted spot verification of the complainant’s land that which has been converted in to non-agricultural land and would have advised him about the different fee structure applicable to such converted land.  But, opposite party have disconnected the electricity without bringing this to the knowledge of the complainant.

14. Further, opposite party has forfeited the deposit amount of Rs.15,700/- paid by complainant’s father towards (1P set) KN1P-77457 is evident from the documents submitted.  The opposite party is hereby directed to, obtain necessary documents from the complainant and if opposite party finds that complainant has utilized the land for non-agricultural purpose such as residential plots, then opposite party is liable to reconnect the electricity after collecting applicable Tariff from the complainant, as electricity is required for providing drinking water.  As opposite party has caused deficiency in service to the complainant, opposite party is liable to give electrical connection after adjusting forfeited deposit to the new Tariff charged.  Accordingly, we answer the point no.1 in the Affirmative.

15. Point No.2:- In the result, we proceed to pass the following ;

O R D E R

1. The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed  in part.
2. The opposite party is directed to reconnect the electricity applicable Tariff to the complainant’s land.
3. The opposite party is directed to obtain necessary documents from the complainant and reconnect the electricity to (1P set) KN 1P- 77457.
4. Further the opposite party is hereby directed to continue that already deposit of Rs.15,700/-.
5. This order is to be complied by the opposite party within 45 days from the date of this order, failing which complainant is at liberty to have a redressal as per law.
6. The opposite party is also hereby directed to pay compensation of Rs.3,000/- towards deficiency in service and cost of litigation of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.
7. Copy of this order as per statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of cost and file shall be consigned to record room.

 (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed, corrected and pronounced in the open Forum on this 29^th  DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021)

    (B. NIRMALAKUMAR)      (RENUKAMBA.C)               (PRAKASH.K)                                      

           MEMBER                    MEMBER                         PRESIDENT