KERALA ELECTRICITY OMBUDSMAN
D.H. Road & Foreshore Road Junction,
Near Gandhi Square,
Ernakulam, Kerala-682 016
Ph: 0484 2346488, Mob: 8714356488
Downloads - Orders
Downloads
 Overview |
 Search Downloads |
 Submit file |
 Up |
| Category: Orders | ||
 Orders |
Files: 1245 | |
| Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman in pdf format |
||
Files:
 P/073/2019 - The Manager, M/s. Sreekala Oxygen Company, Malappuram 
|
|
| The Appellant, Manager, Sreekala Oxygen, Mele Chelari, Thenhipalam is an HT consumer (LCN 21/4274) under Electrical Section, Chelari, having connected load 185.5 kW and contract demand to the extent of 180 kVA. The appellant was being charged extra for the increase in the maximum demand of 180 kVA from 08/2018 to 12/2018. The appellant’s grievance is that they were unnecessarily charged fine for excess demand and energy consumption from August 2018 onwards. Aggrieved by this, the appellant approached CGRF (Northern Region) who dismissed the petition of the appellant vide Order in OP No:08/2019-20 dated 29-08-2019. Aggrieved by the decision of CGRF, the appellant has submitted this Appeal petition before this Authority on 20-09-2019. From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, the respondent is directed to revise the bills for the consumption period of 08/2018 to 12/2018 by fixing the contract demand as 190 kVA at normal rate and the excess demand charge above 190 kVA is quashed and shall be refunded as stated above. The respondent shall also reassess the consumption for the disputed period from 08/2018 to 12/2018 by taking the average of the zone wise consumption for 01/2019, 02/2019 and 03/2019. The excess amount collected shall be refunded by adjusting it in appellant’s future bills. Applicable interest, for the excess amount so collected, shall also be refunded to the appellant. The respondent shall also take steps to review the demand charges for 2 years from 08/2016 to 07/2018 to be realised from the appellant by taking 190 kVA as contract demand on the basis of the RMD. 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 the extent ordered. The order of CGRF, Northern Range, Kozhikode in Petition No. OP/8/2018-19/dated 29-08-2019 is set aside. No order on costs. |
| P/060/2019 - Sri. Tanty K.O., Ernakulam
|
|
| The appellant in this petition was a consumer of the Kerala State Electricity Board Limited bearing No. Consumer No. LCN 7/4514 under Electrical Section, Aluva Town. The supply was given in High Tension category with a contract demand of 200 kVA. Tariff applicable to the consumer is HT IA. The supply of electricity to the consumer is being used for the purpose of manufacturing of tread rubber, compound and allied products. The appellant availed additional power to the extent of 250 kVA on 17 06.2014 after executing a bond dated: 25-05-2012. The appellant had given a letter for disconnection and dismantling of electric connection on 27.03.2018. The Deputy Chief Engineer, Perumbavoor has given a letter on 17.04.2018, claiming Rs. 6,05,000/- as transmission development charge and arrear as Rs. 16,47,157/- and security deposit as Rs. 14,78,157/-. Aggrieved by this, the appellant filed a petition before the CGRF which was disposed vide Order No. 62/2018-19 dated 16-03-2019, ordering that the demand raised by the respondent is correct and the petitioner is bound to pay the same. Challenging the decision of the CGRF, the appellant approached this Authority by filing this appeal petition. From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide as follows: 1. The Transmission Development Charges for Rs. 6,05,000/- issued to the appellant is quashed. The respondent shall issue revised bill for Rs. 4.95 lakhs as calculated above. No interest is payable by the appellant for this amount. 2. The arrear bill for Rs. 16,47,157/- issued to the appellant is also quashed. The respondent shall prepare a revised bill for the pending dues of current charges for the consumption of the months of 12/2017, 01/2018 and 02/2018 with interest till the date of remittance. 3. The respondent shall not collect the fixed charges amounting to Rs 6,08,400/- for the months from 04/2018 to 09/2018 from the appellant. 4. The respondent shall adjust the security deposit with interest against the above-mentioned pending dues of the appellant. 5. The respondent shall issue the revised bills within a period of 30 days from the date of this order and keep pending any Revenue Recovery proceedings during this period. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly and the Appeal Petition filed by the appellant, stands allowed to the extent ordered. The order of CGRF, Ernakulam in 62/2018-19 dated 16-03-2019 is set aside. No order on costs. |
| P/076/2019 - Smt. Yamuna Manoj, Thrissur
|
|
| The appellant, Smt. Yamuna Manoj, is a single-phase domestic consumer with consumer No. 26693 under Electrical Section, Vellangallur, who is aggrieved by the exorbitant electricity bill issued to her for an amount of Rs. 10758.00 for the period from10-01-2019 to 11-03-2019. The connected load in the premises is 3623 watts from 11/2017 onwards. The appellant approached the Assistant Engineer with a complaint on 09-04-2019 regarding the excess reading of the meter and the impugned bill. Accordingly, the respondent verified the correctness of the meter by testing at TMR, Angamaly and found earth load tamper’ indications. Hence the respondent directed the appellant to remit the bill amount. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed a petition before the CGRF, Ernakulam and the Forum disposed of the petition vide order no. CGRF‐CR/OP 22/2019-20 dated 04-09-2019 with a decision that the petition is dismissed due to lack of merits. Against the decision of the Forum, the appellant has filed the Appeal petition before this Authority on 09-10-2019 From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide to set aside the electricity bill amounting to Rs. 10,758/- issued to the appellant. The respondent is directed to revise the bill for the consumption period from 10-01-2019 to 11-03-2019 by taking the average of previous three bimonthly consumption i.e average consumption from 9-7-2018 to 10-01-2019 for 332 units. 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. The order of CGRF, Central Range in Petition No. OP/22/2018-19/dated 04-09-2019 is set aside. No order on costs. |
Contact Us
Any Queries?
Send an email to info@keralaeo.org
Do you Know?
Consumers should submit petitions to CGRF first before appealing Ombudsman.
Visitors Counter
 | Today | 1521 |
 | All | 4875511 |