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/038/2019 Sri. Sanilkumar T R Thrissur 
|
|
| The appellant was a LT consumer who was running an industry named Amber Rubber Resource engaged in manufacturing of rubber bush, rubber metal bonded products, oil seals, valve seals and other related rubber products with consumer No. 18851 under Electrical Section, Koratty. The LT electric connection was taken under Minimum Guarantee (MG) basis valid for 7 years with a registered connected load of 7340 Watts with effect from 25-09-2006. While being so, the appellant applied for enhancing the connected load to 36.44 kW and another Minimum Guarantee Agreement executed by the appellant for 7 years which amounts to 89375/- per year and monthly minimum charges of Rs.7448/- up to 12/2014. The electric connection was dismantled on 29-07-2013 after remittance of minimum guarantee amount up to that date due to closure of industry. The Assistant Engineer Electrical Section office, Koratty thereafter issued a notice dated 20-03-2017 demanding amount of Rs. 1,56,158/- as short assessment in minimum guarantee amount and current charge arrears of Rs. 34,648/- aggregating an amount of Rs. 1,90,806/-. Thereafter revenue recovery notices were issued for recovery of Rs. 3,51,083/-. The appellant challenged the demand made by KSEBL and RR proceedings initiated before Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in WP[c) No: 28437/18 which disposed of the case on 26/11/2018 relegating the complaint to Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum for adjudication and decision of the dispute. Accordingly the appellant approached the CGRF and the Forum disposed of the case on 30/03/2019, in OP 92/2018-19, modifying the demand of KSEB for payment of minimum guarantee amount without surcharge. Still not satisfied by the decision of the CGRF, the appellant has submitted the Appeal petition before this Authority. In view of the above facts, it is decided to quash the arrear bill for Rs. 3,51,083/- as revenue recovery issued to the appellant. From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide as follows. 1. The respondent shall revise the short assessment bill based on the revised MG amount for Rs. 6624/- and Rs. 6126/- for the period from 7/2008 to 8/2013 and 9/2013 to 12/2014 respectively. The respondent shall adjust the overpayments against the pending balance amount of MG payable by the appellant. 2. The respondent shall deduct an amount of Rs. 27520/- as the proportionate MG amount of the transformer from 9/2013 to 12/2014 from the short assessment bill. 3. The cost of the taken back transformer at the depreciated value as per rules, have to be assessed and has to be set against the balance MG amount pending against the consumer. 4. The KSEB shall collect the labour and transportation cost of the work needed for dismantling the Transformer. 5. The appellant need not pay any surcharge for the short assessed amount, till the period of 30 days from the date of this order. The surcharge, if any, will accrue from the due date of the revised bill to be issued based on this order and the actual date of payment. The appellant is required to pay further balance amount, if any, as per the revised bill as ordered above. Once the appellant remits the balance amount, if any, he shall be relieved from the MG liabilities and the Revenue Recovery proceedings. The respondent shall prepare the accounts and settle the claim within 30 days of this order. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly and the Appeal Petition filed by the appellant, stands disposed of to the extent ordered. No order on costs. |
| P/040/2019 Sri. Augustine Damian, Ernakulam
|
|
| The appellant, Sri Augustine Damian is a consumer having Consumer number 1155734008717 under Electrical Section, Kalamassery. The complaint pertains to shifting of post no. KEV - 37/16, for which an amount of Rs.11,577/- under deposit work was remitted by the Kalamassery Municipality on 22-08-2017. The appellant complaints the post causes hindrances to vehicular movement in that area and the appellant and the other residents in that area had submitted request before the Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Kalamassery for shifting the post. Since the respondent had not shifted the electric post, the appellant approached the CGRF for necessary orders to execute the work. The CGRF, Ernakulam has dismissed the petition filed by the appellant in OP No. 76/2018-19 vide order dated 30-04-2019, due to lack of jurisdiction. Aggrieved by the decision of CGRF, the appellant has submitted the Appeal petition before this Authority. From the analysis done above and the conclusions arrived at, this Authority upheld the decision taken by the CGRF in OP No.76/2018-19 dated 30-04-2019. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs. |
| P/035/2019 Sri. Ajayakumar K.M., Kannur
|
|
| M/S Zeal Wood Industries is a LTâ€IV A 3 phase industrial consumer, under Electrical Section, Taliparamba, Kannur, having consumer No.24969. The registered connected load in the premises is 81755 watts. The consumer is running a wood industry registered in the name of Sri. Ajayakumar K.M., the Managing Partner, the appellant. The said service connection was effected on 28-03-2008. The Regional Audit Officer of Kerala State Electricity Board conducted inspection at Electrical Section, Taliparamba on 09-10-2018, and noticed an error that though the Current Transformer (CT) ratio of the metering circuit is 150/5, the multiplication factor (MF) is taken as 20 instead of the 30. On verifying the regular energy bills issued to the consumer, it was found that the bills were issued wrongly taken as MF as 20 instead of 30 from 21-10-2016 onwards. Hence a short assessment bill to recover the loss, amounting to Rs.623446/- was served to the consumer on 22-10-2018. Against this, the consumer had filed a complaint before the CGRF in Op No.119/2018-19.This was disposed of the CGRF by allowing 24 monthly equal instalments. Aggrieved by this order, the appellant preferred this appeal before this Authority. For the reasons detailed above, the appeal Petition No. P/035/2019, filed by the appellant stands dismissed as it lacks merit. The order dated 28-02-2019 in OP No. 119/2018-19 of CGRF, Northern Region, Kozhikode is upheld. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. 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 | 2333 |
 | All | 4876323 |