| The appellant is a commercial consumer under the jurisdiction of Electrical Section Venkidangu having Consumer No B.438 and B.402. The service connection having Consumer No B.402 was dismantled years back. The appellant was given an additional bill of excess consumption for Rs.2335 for the year pertains 1998-99. Another complaint of the appellant is that the respondent has not paid the refund of security deposit on dismantling the connection no. B402. The appellant approached the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum with a prayer lo refund of the excess amount collected on Consumer No B.438 and security deposit on the dismantled con No B.402 with interest and compensation. The Forum dismissed the petition due to lack of jurisdiction, vide order dated 30-06-2018. Aggrieved against this, the appellant has submitted this appeal petition before this Authority.
From the analysis done above, this Authority have reached to the conclusion that in the light by the provision under Clause 22 (d) of the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission (CGRF and Electricity Ombudsman) Regulations, 2005, which restricts the maintainability of the petition filed for the same cause of action and relief, the Appeal Petition filed by Sri. Davis, the appellant, regarding the request for refund of Rs. 2,335/- towards electricity charges collected during the period from 03/98 to 03/99 on consumer number B438 need no further action at this Authority and hence stands dismissed.
Another request of the appellant is the refund of the security deposit of consumer number B402. The appellant produced a copy of a receipt vide No.39 dated 12-02-2004 pertains to consumer number B402 for Rs. 80/- towards the bimonthly energy charge. The service was dismantled on 16-06-2005. The appellant’s claim for refund of security deposit is not challenged by the respondent. In these circumstances, the respondent shall take up the matter of security deposit to the higher authorities of the Licensee on the strength of the receipt and to refund a reasonable deposit with interest from the date of dismantling, since no records available with the respondent.
Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. The Appeal Petition filed by the appellant is found having some merits and is allowed to this extent. The order of CGRF, Central Region in Petition No. OP/146/2017-18/dated 30-06-2018 is modified to this extent. No order on costs. |
|
|
Data
|
| Size |
115.67 KB |
| Downloads |
1258 |
| Created |
2018-11-02 07:09:41 |
|
|
|
Overview
Search Downloads
Submit file
Up
P/070/2018 Sri. K.P. Davis ,Thrissur. 