High Court of KeralaWP(C)/28984/2009disposed of

Sofia Beevi v. Kseb And Another

2015-06-10Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2012/30TH POUSHA 1933 WPC.No. 28984 of 2009 (P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

------------------------- SOFIA BEEVI, KSEB-CONSUMER NO.14932, C/O.M.HANEEFA, KUREEKATTIL HOUSE, CHITTUR WARD, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI. S.A.RAZZAK RESPONDENT(S):

---------------------------

1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRSENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-04.

2. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-04. R1 BY SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE, SC BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN,SC,KSEB SRI.S.SHARAN,SC,K.S.E.BOARD SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR,SC,KSEB REGULATORY COMMN. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR,SC,KSERC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-01-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

There is no representation. The writ petition is dismissed for default.

20/01/2012 SD/-P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE /True Copy/ P.S.to Judge Kss

V. CHITAMBARESH, J --------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 28984 OF 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of June, 2015

JUDGMENT

Ext. P3 provisional bill to the tune of Rs. 36,639/- has been reduced to Rs. 10,654/- in Ext.P5 final assessment order. This was done taking note of the consumption of electrical energy during the relevant period even though unauthorised connected load was only seen in the premises. One half of Rs. 10,654/- has already been remitted by the petitioner while filing Ext. P6 appeal under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The balance amount is only Rs. 5,327/- for which there is not necessity for a direction to re-consider the issue. 2.

The appellate authority in Ext.P7 order has taken note of the relevant circumstances and has found that the assessment is at par with the additional load connected. I am not inclined to interfere with the concurrent orders of the authorities taking note of the facts involved and also the amount remaining unpaid and the efflux of time. 3.

I however permit the petitioner to pay the balance amount due with applicable interest in three equal bi-monthly instalments. The amount shall be paid along with the

W.P.(C). NO. 28984 OF 2009 2 bi-monthly bill amount which the petitioner is otherwise obliged to pay. The failure to pay any one of the instalments will empower the respondents to resort to coercive steps. The writ petition is disposed of.

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE DCS