IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PAPTHANAMTHITTA Dated this the 21st day of February, 2011 Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member) Sri. N. Premkumar (Member) C.C.No.113/10 (Filed on 06.08.2010) Between: Sri. K.K. Kunjunni, Ambalathumkavil Thazhethil, Aruvappulam. P.O., Konni. ..... Complainant. And: 1. Asst. Executive Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, Pathanamthitta. 2. Asst. Engineer, -do. –do. ..... Opposite parties. O R D E R Sri. N. Premkumar (Member): Complainant filed this complaint for getting a relief from the Forum. 2. Fact of the case in brief is as follows: Complainant is the beneficiary of water connection, which was taken in his mother in law’s name. 3. According to the complainant, water connection has taken immediately after the commission of Aruvapulam Water Supply Scheme. He has been prompt in payment of water charges from the date of connection onward. Recently he paid one year fixed charges as advance. But opposite parties failed to supply water regularly. His wife was a teacher. While she has been working as teacher, she suffered a lot due to the non-supply of water. 4. Complainant is at the age of 73; his wife’s age is 64. His mother in law’s sister’s age is 96. All of them suffered untold miseries due to the irregular supply of water. At the time of complainant’s mother in law’s death and funeral functions, he and other members of the family suffered too much due to the non-supply of water. Hence this complaint for compensation and a direction to opposite parties to the prompt supply of water. 5. Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version stating that complainant is not a consumer. But water connection under consumer No.87 has taken by one P.N. Kalyaniamma as stated in the complaint. The said connection was taken on 26.8.1987. It is taken from main pumping line of Aruvapulam Panchayat Water Supply Scheme. Therefore, whenever pumping has taken place, complainant would get sufficient water, usually there cannot occur any interruption in pumping and distribution. As per the Consumer’s Personal Ledger the complainant has used an average consumption of 20-25 KL/M. But complainant has been remitting fixed charge of 10 KL/M. He remitted the fixed charge in advance up to 12/2010. He has not remitted additional consumption amount of ` 355 from 5.2.09 to 16.9.09. The additional bill was issued on 15.2.2010. The details of meter reading is shown below: Date | Meter Reading | Consumption | No.of months | Average consumption | 15.09.2009 | 2231 KL | -- | -- | -- | 02.09.2010 | 2457 | 226 KL | 11 ½ months | 19.65 KL |
6. As per the present meter reading i.e. from 9.9.09 to 9.8.2010 the average consumption is 20 KL/M. Opposite parties prepared an additional bill for additional consumption of the said quantity of water up to the period of 2.9.2010 and issued to the consumer. The meter reading shows that the complainant was using sufficient quantity of water. Moreover, complainant has failed to indicate the consumer number in the complainant. He has not shown either the provisional invoice card or the meter reading card at the time of the inspection of opposite parties officials. The said records were not produced before the 1st opposite party’s office even though notice has been served to complainant. Therefore complaint has no basis and hence opposite parties canvassed for the dismissal of the complaint. 7. From the above pleadings, following points were raised for consideration: (1) Whether the complaint is maintainable before the Forum? (2) Whether the reliefs sought for in the complaint are allowable? (3) Reliefs & Costs? 8. Evidence of the complaint consists of the proof affidavit filed by the complainant along with certain documents. Documents produced were marked as Ext.A1 to A6. Apart from version along with a copy of personal ledger of Con.No.87, opposite parties had not cared to adduce any evidence. After the closure of evidence, both sides were heard. 9. Point Nos.1 to 3:- In order to prove the complainant’s case, complain ant filed proof affidavit along with certain documents. Documents produced by him have been marked as Ext.A1 to A6. Ext.A1 is the copy of death certificate of complainant’s mother in law, P.N. Kalyaniamma. Ext.A2 is the copy of Ration Card of complainant. Ext.A3 is the bill-dated 6.10.2010 issued by the opposite parties. Ext.A4 is the receipt of bill amount plus advance bill i.e. ` 4,492. Ext.A5 is the copy of notes issued by opposite parties. Ext.A6 is another notes issued by opposite parties demanding to produce provisional invoice card and meter reading card. 10. Opposite parties has not cared to adduce any evidence to prove their contention. 11. Complainant’s case is that opposite parties are not regular in supplying water even though he has been making regular and prompt payment of water charges. Opposite parties contention is that usually there has not occurred any fault in pumping water. The average consumption as per meter reading is 20 KL/M. Complainant has been remitting fixed minimum charges of 10 KL/M. He has to pay additional consumption i.e. over and above minimum quantity of water as per fixed charges. More over at the time of inspection he has not produced the provisional invoice card and meter reading card. 12. As per Ext.A1 and A2 it can be seen that complainant is the beneficiary of Con.No.87 and comes within the definition of consumer. Therefore complaint is maintainable before this Forum. 13. Even though the complainant has the complaint that he did not get regular supply of water, he failed to point out the period he has not got water. Evidence on record does not reveal that complainant had given any complaint against the opposite parties with regard to his difficulties. But materials on record show that his average consumption of water is 20 KL/M. He has not challenged the accuracy of the water meter. Therefore in the absence of cogent evidence complaint is not allowable. 14. But on a perusal of Ext.A3 it is seen that complainant has to pay additional amount of ` 935. Ext.A5 is the notes showing two amounts i.e. ` 3,262 and ` 4,492. According to complainant Ext.A5 is the additional amount of ` 3,262 demanded by opposite parties. Ext.A4 shows that complainant remitted ` 4,490 including Ext.A5 amount of ` 3,262. According to complainant the difference between ` 4,490 and ` 3,262 is the amount remitted as advance. 15. It is pertinent to note that as per Ext.A3 dues upto 2.9.2010 is ` 935 only. Evidence on record does not reveal that opposite parties had not issued a subsequent proper bill after the issuance of Ext.A3. But Ext.A5 shows that opposite parties demanded ` 3,262 in a piece of paper. Ext.A4 shows that complainant remitted the said amount. Even though complainant not challenged Ext.A5, it is not fair and proper on the part of opposite parties to issue such a bill. They cannot have any right to realise over and above Ext.A3 amount until and unless by issuing a proper bill after the said period showing the period of consumption and quantity consumed etc. Therefore opposite parties are directed to issue proper bill instead of Ext.A5. If excess quantity consumed, otherwise the excess amount as per Ext.A5 be refunded or to adjust in the future payment of the complainant. 16. In the result, this complaint is dismissed with the above direction. No cost. Declared in the Open Forum on this the 21st day of February, 2011. (Sd/-) N. Premkumar, (Member) Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) : (Sd/-) Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member) : (Sd/-) Appendix: Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil. Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant: A1 : Copy of death certificate of complainant’s mother in law, P.N. Kalyaniamma. A2 : Copy of Ration Card of complainant. A3 : Copy of bill dated 6.10.2010 for ` 935 issued by the opposite parties. A4 : Copy of receipt dated 09.10.2009 issued by the opposite parties. A5 : Copy of notes issued by opposite parties. A6 : Copy of notes issued by opposite parties demanding to produce provisional invoice card and meter reading card. Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties: Nil. Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties: Nil. (By Order) Senior Superintendent Copy to: (1) Sri. K.K. Kunjunni, Ambalathumkavil Thazhethil, Aruvappulam. P.O., Konni. (2) The Asst. Executive Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, Pathanamthitta. (3) The Asst. Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, Pathanamthitta. (4) The stock file. | 
