Overview Search Downloads Submit file Up
Category: Orders
Page 3 of 262
Order by: Default | Name | Date | Hits | [Descending]
Orders Files: 784
Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman in pdf format
P/050/2018 to P/65/2018 Guruvayur, Thrissur


The appellants are the individual Villa owners at Santhimadom Villa Project. The appellants’ grievance is that the collection of Rs.203.26 per square metre of the residential area from the Appellant to give service connections by installing 3 No.100 kVA transformers is against the regulations in the Supply Code and the respondent is bound to repay the excess amount collected from the appellants as against the regulations in the Supply Code. The appellants filed petitions before the CGRF, Ernakulam in OP Nos. 111 to 126 which were disposed of vide order dated 31-05-2018, by holding that it is better to abstain from going into the merits of the case as the subject matter on the same issue is pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in WP (C) No.28266/2016. Aggrieved with the above decisions of CGRF, the appellants have approached this Authority with this appeal petition on 14-08-2018. Earlier an appeal petition No. 136/2015 on the same subject matter filed by one Sri. Jayaprakash was disposed by this Authority in order dated 18-01-2016. The brief fact of the case is as follows: M/s Santhimadom Builders and Developers applied for power demand for 1184.40 kVA for their two residential cum commercial complexes namely Kottapady North Project & South Project. But they abandoned the projects and the individual owners completed the villas later and they applied for electric connection separately. The individual owners completed residential villas of North Project and they were given electric connection after remitting the expenditure as demanded by the KSEB Limited. Few individual owners of South Project approached the Hon’ble High Court seeking direction to dispose of their applications for electric connections without insisting the payment of the expenses to be incurred for providing new transformer. The contention of the villa owners is that the total power requirement, as specified by the builder, will not come more than 1 MW and the demand for bearing cost of transformer and other equipments cannot be sustained. Aggrieved by the decision of the KSEBL some of the applicants approached the Honourable High Court. The Hon’ble High Court disposed of the case by directing the respondents to provide electric connection on remittance of cost required for up-gradation of distribution system. Based on the judgment, 55 individual owners remitted the requisite amount proportionate to their plinth area and obtained connection. After availing the connection, one of the building owners, Sri Paramu Kumaran approached Hon'ble High Court stating that the total requirement of the present building owners comes only 350 kW which is less than 1 MW and requested to refund the excess amount remitted for availing service connection. In the judgment, the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala have directed the writ petitioner, Sri Paramu Kumaran, S/o Paraman Kalluchirayil, to approach CGRF under Section 130(8) of Kerala Electricity Supply Code (KESC) 2014. Sri M Jayaprakash, Navitha Rooms, S2, AP3 201 D2, Iringapuram P.O., Guruvayur filed a petition before the CGRF requesting to refund the excess amount remitted for availing service connection and which was dismissed vide order dated 21-05-2015 holding that the petitioner does not come under the definition of “complainant” as per law. The appeal submitted by Sri Jayaprakash in Appeal No. 136/2015 was disposed by holding that the proportionate expenditure of Rs. 203.26 per square metre arrived by the respondent is found as excess and hence directed to recalculate the rate and to issue orders accordingly and also directed that the excess amount remitted by the all the applicants shall be adjusted in the future bills or to refund the amount. It was also insisted that as the service connections of 55 villas of the scheme were effected and in the circumstances the builder is not proceeding with the project and also considering the direction of Hon’ble High Court in this matter, connections to the rest of applicants may be given as per the provisions of Electricity Act and the Regulations. The said order of this Authority in the Appeal petition has been challenged by the KSEBL before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in WP (C) 28826 of 2016 and is pending for disposal. Since a writ petition filed by the respondent lies before the Hon. High Court of Kerala and in the light of the provision under 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, the appeal petition filed by the appellants, need no further action at this Forum and hence needs to be rejected. For the reasons detailed above, the appeal Petitions, filed by the appellants stand dismissed as it is found not maintainable before this Authority. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs.
P/073/2018 Sri. Alex Antony, Thiruvananthapuram


The appellant is having a three phase electric connection with Consumer No. 9329 of Electrical Section, Cantonment for running an establishment in the name and style “Digital House” under LT IV A industrial tariff. While so on 10-08-2017, the APTS of KSEBL conducted an inspection in the premises and found that an unauthorised connected load of 13983 watts in the premises and also detected dissimilar phase association of current and voltage at the terminal of ToD meter installed in the premises. Accordingly, the appellant was served with a short assessment bill, assessing for a period of 53 months (3/2013 to 7/2017), when the meter was found recording 30% less than the actual, so as to recover the unrecorded portion of energy, for Rs. 4,11,698/-. The consumer filed objection before the Assessing officer, the Asst. Engineer, against the said assessment. The Assistant Engineer has revised the bill to Rs. 2,11,475/- for a period of 24 months. Being not satisfied with the decision of the Assistant Engineer, the consumer approached the CGRF, Kottarakkara, with Petition No. OP 48/2018 and the Forum disposed of the petition, vide order dated 13th July 2018, stating that as per Reg. 152 of Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014, the licensee can realize the loss sustained.. But preparation of short assessment bill based on the Reg. 125 of Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014 is not correct since Reg. 125 shall apply only for billing in the case of defective or damaged meter”. The Assistant Engineer had again revised the bill to Rs. 89,992/- for a period of 24 months. Aggrieved by the decision, the appellant has submitted the Appeal petition before this Forum. From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide to set aside the short assessment bill amounting to Rs. 89,992/- issued to the appellant. The respondent is directed to revise the bills for the consumption for the period of 24 months prior to the rectification of the defects of the energy meter by taking an average consumption of 09/2017, 10/2017 and 11/2017i.e. Normal average 2875 units (average of 3120, 2600 & 2904), Off peak average 70 units (average of 40, 80 & 90 units) and Peak average 687 units (average of 720, 640 & 700 units). Accordingly the respondent shall raise a bill for the invalid phase association period from 01-08-2015 to 31-07-2017, and issue the revised bill to the consumer within fifteen days.   Having concluded and decided as above it is ordered accordingly. The Appeal Petition filed by the appellant is allowed to this extent as ordered and stands disposed of as such. The order of CGRF in 48/2018 dated 13-07-2017 is modified to this extent. No order on costs.
P/074/2018 Sri. Gangadharan C ,Kannur


The appellant, Sri Gangadharan, is a domestic consumer with consumer No. 10105 under Electrical Section, Kakkayangad having connected load of 4250 Watts. The grievance of the appellant is that the respondent issued an exorbitant bill amounting to Rs. 23,119/- on 28-9-2017 for a bimonthly consumption of 2811 units. The appellant approached the respondent with a complaint against the impugned bill. But the respondent stated that they have checked the accuracy of the meter and no variations or discrepancies were noticed during the testing of the existing meter. Accordingly the respondent directed the appellant to remit the bill amount. Being aggrieved against the direction, the appellant filed a petition before the CGRF, Kozhikode with a request to grant 12 equal monthly installments and the Forum disposed of the petition vide order no. OP 120/2017-18 dated 16-01-2018 allowing the petition. The appellant had filed an appeal petition before this Authority with a request to waive the bill amount of Rs. 23,119/-. The request of the appellant before the CGRF was for granting installments in the bill amount, but before this Authority is to waive the bill stating other arguments, which were not considered by the CGRF. Hence the appellant was allowed to remit the previous bill amount for the month of 9/2017 for the time being and the appellant was directed to prefer a petition describing his grievances before CGRF by complying with the formalities for filing petition, if he desires so and the CGRF shall consider the same, vide order no. P/09/2018 dated 30-04-2018. On the basis of this order, the appellant submitted another petition before the CGRF, which was dismissed in Petition OP No. 35/2018-19 dated 31-07-2018. Aggrieved by this order, the appellant filed appeal petition before this Authority with a request to waive the bill amount of Rs. 23,119/-. From the analysis done and the conclusions arrived at, which are detailed above, I take the following decisions. The bill for Rs. 23,119/- is quashed. The respondent is directed to revise the bill for the period from 4-5-2017 to 28-9-2017 by taking the average of the consumption of three billing cycles after 3-11-2017 after deducting the bills already paid during the disputed period. The order of CGRF, Kozhikode vide order no. P/35/2018-19 dated 31-07-2018 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.

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