IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY FRIDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 15TH MAGHA 1932 WA.No. 59 of 2011() ------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.36750/2009 Dated 12/11/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ BELL FOODS MARINE DIVISION, (COLD INTERNATIONAL MERCHANDISIG CO.) CONSUMER NO. 5562012511, PALLICHAL ROAD, COCHIN-5, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR VIKRAMAN. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.SEN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SMT.SHAHNA KARTHIKEYAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDHUTHI BHAWAN, PATTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THOPPUMPADY, KOCHI-682005. 3. THE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES REDRESSAL FORUM (KSEB), CENTRAL REGION, POWER HOUSE, ERNAKULAM NORTH P.O., COCHIN-18. 4. THE STATE ELECTRICITY OMBUDSMAN, THAANATH BUILDING, CLUB JUNCTION, PUKKATTUPADI ROAD, EDAPPALLY TOLL, KOCHI-24. MR.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.R. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. .................................................................... W.A.No.59 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 4th day of February, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The question raised is whether the KSEB rightly classified appellant's freezing unit as a commercial establishment liable to pay electricity charges under tariff entry LT-VIIA, which is for commercial connection. The appellant's contention is that the appellant is an industrial unit and so much so, electricity connection to the cold storage unit which is for storage of its products under freezing conditions should also be under the industrial tariff, LT-IV. Learned Single Judge found against the appellant and confirmed the demand of the Electricity Board for the reason that the appellant already has got a separate industrial connection to the industrial unit, where fish is processed and stored. The 2nd connection taken is exclusively to the freezing unit where the appellant is doing W.A.No.59/2011 2 business of licensing freezing unit to other parties on chargeable basis. The appellant approached all the authorities, namely, the Electricity Regulatory Commission, the Electricity Grievance Redressal Forum and also the Electricity Ombudsman and all of them held that a freezing unit run for providing facilities to several persons to store goods in the freezing unit is a commercial activity chargeable under LT-VIIA. We do not find any justification to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge confirming the demand against the appellant for the freezing unit under LT- VIIA for the reason that the appellant is retaining a separate connection for running cold storage as a business by itself. In fact, many marine industries have their own freezers to keep perishable goods in cold storage. However, when cold storage is run as a business activity, the tariff applicable to commercial establishments have to be applied. If the appellant is not engaged in any commercial activity like providing facility for others to store goods in appellant's freezing unit, then there was no need for the appellant to take a separate connection for the freezing unit. If the appellant stores only their own products in the freezing unit, then W.A.No.59/2011 3 instead of applying for and taking separate connection to the freezing unit the appellant could have taken power supply to the cold storage unit from the industrial connection, which the appellant already has. Obviously the freezing unit is run as a commercial activity to provide cold storage facility to others which is a common business in the coastal towns of Kerala. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the Writ Appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JUDGE) jg