Overview Search Downloads Submit file Up
Category: Orders
Page 8 of 312
Order by: Default | Name | Date | Hits | [Descending]
Orders Files: 936
Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman  in pdf format
P/018/2020 Sri. Babu Mathew Ernakulam


The appellant, Sri Babu Mathew, is a domestic consumer with consumer No. 6476 under Electrical Section, Parakkadavu having connected load of 7234 Watts. The grievance of the appellant is that the respondent issued an additional bill amounting to Rs. 65146/- on 28-01-2019 for consumption of 9476 units for the door lock period from 21-11-2016 to 28-01-2019. The appellant approached the Assistant Engineer with a complaint against the impugned bill and the meter was tested with a parallel meter. But the respondent stated that they have checked the accuracy of the meter in the TMR Division, Angamaly and no variations or discrepancies were noticed during the testing of the existing meter. Being aggrieved against the bill, the appellant filed a petition before the CGRF, Ernakulam with a request to cancel the bill and the Forum disposed of the petition vide order no. OP 51/2019-20 dated 16-12-2019 with direction to the respondent to reassess the disputed bill according to the readings available from the downloaded data as well as from the readings taken. Now the appellant has filed this appeal petition before this Authority with a request to waive the bill amount on 03-03-2020. From the analysis done and the conclusions arrived at, which are detailed above, I take the following decisions. The bill for Rs.65146/- dated 28-01-2019 and the revised bill for Rs.64153/-are quashed. The respondent is directed to revise the bill for the period from 11/2016 to 09/2018 by taking the average of the three-bimonthly consumption from 21/05/2016 to 21/11/2016 i.e., 57 units bi-month. The billing for the period from 01/10/2018 to 01/03/2019 shall be done based on the actual consumption as per the downloaded data. The order of CGRF, Ernakulam in OP No. 51/2019-20 dated 16-12-2019 is set aside. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. The Appeal Petition filed by the appellant is found having merits and is allowed. No order on costs.
P/010/2020 Smt. Bindu K.V. Ernakulam


The appellant, Smt. Bindu K.V. is a three phase domestic consumer with consumer No. 1558 under Electrical Section, Vadakkekkara, Ernakulam who is aggrieved by the an additional electricity bill issued to her for an amount of Rs. 24419/- for the period from 04/2016 to 04/2019 due to recording meter reading mistakenly. The connected load in the premises is 5001 watts effected from 01-04-1957. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed a petition regarding the impugned bill before the CGRF, Ernakulam and the Forum disposed of the petition vide order no. OP 58/2019-20 dated 31-12-2019 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 06-02-2020. From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide to set aside the arrear electricity bill amounting to Rs. 24419/- issued to the appellant. The respondent is directed to revise the bimonthly bill for the consumption period from 18-02-2019 to 24-04-2019 by taking the average of three succeeding bi-month’s consumption in the meter, i.e., 271 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, Ernakulam in Petition No. OP 58/2019-20 dated 31-12-2019 is set aside. No order on costs.
REVIEW PETITION No. RP 01/2020 in APPEAL PETITION No. P/003/2020 The Assistant Executive Engineer, Velloorkunnam,


The review petitioner, the Assistant Executive Engineer, KSE Board Ltd, Electrical Sub Division, Velloorkunnam had filed a review petition against the orders issued by this Authority in appeal petition No. P/003/2020 dated 18-03-2020. The review petition was time barred by limitation and the review petitioner had requested to condone the delay due to ‘lock down’ declared by Central and State governments from 23-03-2020 onwards. Considering the request of the review petition, he has been given an opportunity to hear his arguments. The arguments now raised cannot be considered for a review, as it was considered, decided and order issued accordingly. In the analysis in the order it was stated that in the revised tariff for all categories with effect from 08-07-2019 issued by KSERC vide order dated 08-07-2019, old age homes which charge inmates for boarding and lodging comes under LT VI (B) category and this is a new category included in the tariff revision order. It is clearly stated in the Annexure II of the tariff revision order that this category was not included any tariff category prior to 08-07-2019 and also not shown under LT VI ( C ) category, as claimed by the review petitioner. Hence a clear clarification to assign the correct tariff is required in this matter and the review petitioner is free to issue the additional bill accordingly. In this background, this Authority didn’t find any reason to intervene the order already issued. In view of the above discussions, I hold that review petition is not maintainable and hence rejected.

Contact Us

Charangattu Bhavan,
Building No-36/895,
Mamangalam- Anchumana Road,
Edappally- P O.Kochi 682024, KERALA,
Phone#  +91 484 2346488

Any Queries?

Send an email to

Do you Know?

Consumers should submit  petitions to CGRF first before appealing Ombudsman.

Visitors Counter