Downloads
Overview Search Downloads Submit file Up
Category: Orders
Page 159 of 427
Order by: Default | Name | Date | Hits | [Descending]
Orders Files: 1280
Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman  in pdf format
Files:
P/011/2019- Sri. Madhusoodanan Pillai Thiruvananthapuram

Download 
Download
The Appellant Sri. Madhusoodanan Pillai is a registered Consumer of Electrical Section, Peroorkada having Consumer No. 32107 (effected on 24.09.2016) having construction tariff LT VI F of Electrical Section, Peroorkada under Electrical Sub Division, Vellayambalam. The appellant’s grievance is that the respondent has not provided a permanent connection to his premises by erecting 2" dia GI Pipe as requested by him, instead demanded an estimate cost Rs. 10081/- on 29.10.2018 with the pole insertion and allied works, for the work. The appellant filed a complaint before the CGRF for effecting the domestic connection using GI pipe. The CGRF disposed the case stating that there is no provision to effect the supply by using a metallic pipe as weather proof support suggested by the petitioner and hence the petitioner is liable to remit the estimate cost demanded by the Assistant Engineer vide its order dated 17-01-2019 in OP No. 143/2018. In view of the above factual position I don’t find any reason to interfere with the findings and decision taken by the CGRF, Kottarakkara in this case and hence the order of CGRF in OP No. 143/2018 dated 17-01-2019 is upheld. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs.
P/009/2019 - Sri. P.S. Sudheer Babu Palakkad

Download 
Download
The Appellant is a consumer under Electrical Section, 0ttapalam with Consumer No. 1165339007474. The 3 phase connection was given under LT 7A Tariff for running Hotel and Restaurant named as Hotel Aramana. The APTS, Palakkad inspected the premises of the appellant on 28.05.2018 and found that the energy used in one phase (out of 3 phases) was not recording in the meter. Accordingly a short assessment bill was issued to the appellant for an amount of Rs. 3,59,749/- for the period January 2017 to May 2018. Being aggrieved with the short assessment, the consumer approached the CGRF, Northern Region, with Petition No. 54/2018-19 and the Forum disposed of the petition on 13-11-2018 by quashing the bill amount of Rs.359749/- and also directed the respondent to revise the short assessment by limiting the period of assessment to 12 months. Aggrieved by the decision, the appellant has submitted the Appeal petition before this Authority. From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide to uphold the decision of the CGRF, Kozhikode. The respondent is directed to revise the short assessment bill by limiting the period of assessment to 12 months prior to the rectification of the metering system. The respondent shall issue a revised bill within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. Having concluded and decided as above it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs.
REVIEW PETITION NO. RP/02/2019 IN APPEAL PETITION No. P/089/2018 - The Assistant Executive Engineer, Karunagappally South,

Download 
Download
The review respondent/appellant is the Managing partner of the M.G. Roller Flour Mill, an SSI Unit conducting flour making unit. The inspecting authorities of TMR Thirumala conducted a field inspection in the review respondent’s/appellant's premises on 02.08.2017 and found that the PT Secondary RY and BY Voltages are low and hence the PT unit was suspected to be faulty and directed him to enhance the contract demand and to replace the PT unit with new PT of accuracy class 0.2 and to change CT with ratio 10/5 A to 15/5 A with accuracy Class 0.2S. The review petitioner has imposed penalty as 50% extra over the prevailing rate applicable both demand and energy for two months during which the appellant failed to replace the faulty metering component, and one month thereafter. The review respondent has challenged the penal bill before Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum in O.P. No. 94/2018 and the CGRF dismissed the petition vide order dated 05-11-2018. Aggrieved by the order of the CGRF, the review respondent/appellant has submitted appeal petition against the orders of CGRF which was admitted in appeal no. 89/2018 and disposed of the appeal by quashing the 50% extra imposed for three months over the prevailing rate applicable both demand and energy charge, vide order dated 27-02-2019. The review petitioner has filed this review petition against the orders of this Authority. In view of the above discussions the review jurisdiction is limited to rectify a mistake or error which is apparent on the face of records and it cannot be used as appellate jurisdiction. So, in view of the fact that the review petitioner has not pointed out anything which escaped the notice of this Authority while disposing the matter earlier, I hold the review petition is not maintainable and hence rejected.
Back

Contact Us

KERALA ELECTRICITY OMBUDSMAN
D.H. Road & Foreshore Road Junction,
Near Gandhi Square,
Ernakulam, Kerala-682 016
Ph: 0484 2346488, Mob: 8714356488

Any Queries?

Send an email to info@keralaeo.org

Do you Know?

Consumers should submit  petitions to CGRF first before appealing Ombudsman.

Visitors Counter

mod_vvisit_counterToday5302
mod_vvisit_counterAll5347964