DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 28th day of September 2017
Present : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President
: Smt.Suma.K.P. Member Date of filing: 08/03/2017
: Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
(C.C.No.46/2017)
Aboobakkar Sidiq, - Complainant
S/o Syed Muhammed, S.A.S Manzil,
Karingulam, Elavancherry PO,
Palakkad 678 508.
(Adv.R.Gangadharan)
V/s
1. The Asst.Executive Engineer, - Opposite party
Kerala Water Authority,
Chittur, Palakkad.
(Adv.K.A.Stanly James)
O R D E R
By Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member,
Brief Facts of the complaint
The case of the complainant is that he has taken 1063/ELY No.domestic water connection from Kerala Water Authority on 02.12.2011 and has been regularly paying water charge since then. He has been given intimation of excess payment of Rs.67/- and meter reading on 17.12.2016 showed the water consumption was 1955 kilo liters. According to the complainant, at the time of fitting the meter instead of 0001 kilo liters, reading was 1000 kilo liters and the same was brought to the notice of the plumber of Kerala Water Authority who fitted the meter at that time. The concerned meter reading was recorded in the card. As per bill no.23694159 dated.04.02.2017, demand notice for Rs.29,920/- was given to the complainant which includes the previous bill adjustment of Rs.29,640/-. According to the complainant, although a complaint in this regard was given on 14.02.2017 to Nenmara Water Authority office, no reply was received so far. Complainant pleads that the demand notice of Kerala Water Authority caused to him mental agony and loss of pride. Hence the complainant prays to the Hon’ble Forum to direct the opposite party to cancel the false bill already issued to him and issue him a fresh correct bill.
The complaint was admitted and notice was issued to opposite party.
In their version opposite party contends that except those specifically admitted he denies all the statements in the complaint. He also contends that the complainant is a consumer of Kerala Water Authority with consumer no:ELY/1063/D from 02.12.2011. According to opposite party, at the time of giving water connection to the consumer monthly water charge rate was fixed provisionally at Rs.67/- for fifteen kilo liters; if as per meter reading excess consumption occurred, for excess consumption excess bill would be issued according to opposite party, this was the practice followed by Kerala Water Authority up to 12/2016. Now Kerala Water Authority has changed to bimonthly billing system “E Abacus” where bill is given once in two months. In this case the concerned consumer paid @ Rs.67/- which was provisionally fixed water charge for fifteen kilo liters, for the period from 12/2011 to 12/2016. After changing the water connection to bimonthly billing system of “E Abacus”, the first bill is given to consumers on the basis of previous average monthly consumption. In this case, in the first bill given to the complainant on 17.12.2016, Rs.67/- credit bill was given after adjusting the already paid water charge of Rs.67/- per fifteen kilo liters consumption up to 11/2016 and on 17.12.2016 the water consumption of the complainant was 1955 kilo liters and the consumer’s per month water usage was 60.9 kilo liters for which water charge was Rs.1,136/- . From 27.07.2014, because of excess usage by the consumer excess arrear of Rs.29,640/- occurred. This excess arrear together with bimonthly water charge was Rs.29,920/- and the bill for Rs.29,920/- was given on 06.02.2017. Opposite party also contends that at the time of giving new water connection after inspecting the meter at the office, meter is fixed in the house of consumer. At that time 1000 liters water will be inserted through the meter to inspect the working efficiency of the meter, then it is testified and connection will be given. Hence in this case first meter reading was shown as 1000 liters in PIC card and according to the opposite party, the complainant had misunderstood 1000 liters as 1000 kilo liters. For the complainant there is no dispute in the meter reading of 209 kilo liters on 29.07.2014. Therefore the statement of the complainant that the 1st meter reading was 1000 kilo liters is false. Since there was no excess usage up to 29.07.2014 bill was not given during this period. But between 29.07.2014 and 17.12.2016 monthly usage of the complainant was 60.9 kilo liters and after adjusting the provisionally fixed monthly water charge of Rs.67/- for fifteen kilo liters water usage excess arrear bill for Rs.29,640/- was given. As per the present meter reading monthly water charge was Rs.172/- for 24.5 kilo liters, including this arrear bill for Rs.29,920/- was given to the complainant.
Hence the opposite party prays to the Hon’ble Forum to dismiss the complaint.
Complainant filed chief affidavit and documents marked as Exts.A1 to A4. Opposite party also filed affidavit and documents marked as Ext.B1 series. Both parties were heard.
The following issues were framed in this case.
- Whether there is any deficiency in service and/or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party?
- If so what is the relief?
Issues 1 & 2
According to the complainant as per the consumer meter card issued to
him at the time of giving him domestic water connection on 02.12.2011 meter reading began with 1000 kilo liters and the consumer meter card was marked as Ext.A1. The complainant was paying Rs.67/- per month up to 12/2011 which is indicated by provisional invoice card marked as Ext.A2. The water charge receipts issued by the opposite party for water charges paid by the complainant from 12/2011 to 12/2016 are marked as Ext.A3 series. According to the complainant a demand notice was issued by the opposite party which indicates total amount payable by the complainant as Rs.29,920/- and bimonthly water charge as Rs.343/-. According to the complainant only 955 kilo liters will come after 1000 kilo liters are deducted from 1955 kilo liters. The reading of 1955 kilo liters on 17.12.2016 was indicated in demand and disconnection notice dated.16.12.2016 which was marked as Ext.A4. According to the complainant at the time of giving water connection average usage was fifteen kilo liters and the same is used by him even now. Hence the complainant prays to the Hon’ble Forum to direct the opposite party to cancel the bill No:23694159 dated.04.02.2017 for Rs.29,920/- and to issue him a fresh bill plus compensation for mental agony and disgrace suffered by him plus litigation expenses incurred by him.
As per the version filed by the opposite party, opposite party agrees that complainant is a domestic consumer of water connection given by Kerala Water Authority. According to the opposite party complainant’s monthly water charge was provisionally fixed as Rs.67/- for a maximum usage of fifteen kilo liters per month and for excess usage complainant would be charged extra. In 12/2016 following computerization of water connections and transfer of them “E Abacus” system was introduced were the bill is given bimonthly. In this case the actual bill for the water used by the complainant after adjusting already remitted amount was issued as per which complainant was liable to pay Rs.29,640/- as arrears as on 17.12.2016 and as per meter reading on 06.02.2017 complainant was liable to pay Rs.29,920/- including arrears of Rs.29,640/-. Opposite party also contends that it is the usual practice at the time of giving new water connection to send 1 kilo liter water through the meter to verify the working efficiency of the meter before installation and after finding that the meter is in order the same is certified by the authority, connection will be given and this reading (1 kilo liter) will be recorded in the card given to the consumer which was done regarding this complainant also. On 29.07.2014 the meter reading was 209 kilo liters and on 17.12.2016 meter reading was 1955 kilo liters which show that complainant has consumed 60.9 kilo liters of water between 29.07.2014 & 17.12.2016 for which he is liable to pay Rs.1,136/- per month. These details are indicated by Kerala Water Authority’s consumer personal ledger extract marked as Ext.B1 series in respect of consumer No.1063 of the complainant. Opposite party also refused the argument of the complainant that the initial meter reading on the date of connection was not 1000 liters but 1000 kilo liters. On 29.07.2014 the meter reading was 209 kilo liters and in no case after consuming water the meter reading will come down but the meter reading will increase with more water consumption. According to the opposite party if the initial reading was 1000 kilo liters on 02.12.2011 then the reading on 29.07.2014 should have been 1209 kilo liters which is not there in this case but only 209 kilo liters as per Ext.B1 series. Hence opposite party humbly prays to the Hon’ble Forum to accept his contentions and dismiss the complaint with cost to this opposite party.
From the documentary evidences submitted, we observe that the complainant is seen to have misunderstood the initial meter reading on date of giving him water connection on 02.12.2011 as 1000 kilo liters instead of 1000 liters; actually the meter readings were 209 kilo liters on 29.07.2014 and 1955 kilo liters on 17.12.2016. We also view that if initial reading had been taken as 1000 kilo liters on 02.12.2011, then meter reading on 29.07.2014 could not have been 209 kilo liters because with increased water consumption meter would have showed higher meter reading and if no water was used it would have shown the same reading of 1000 kilo liters, but in no case meter reading would show a lower figure than initial reading. Hence we observe that complainant’s argument that initial reading on 02.12.2011 was 1000 kilo liters cannot be accepted. Further, we also observe from the documentary evidences, between 29.07.2014 & 17.12.2016 the complainant is seen to have consumed more than 15 kilo liters for which he had paid water charge @ Rs.67/- only fixed for 15 kilo liters water consumption.
In the light of the above we view that opposite party is not seen to have committed any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in this case.
Therefore complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 28rd day of September 2017.
Sd/-
Shiny.P.R.
President
Sd/-
Suma.K.P.
Member
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan
Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 - Consumer meter card No.1063, issued by Kerala Water Authority,
Nemmara
Ext.A2 – Provisional invoice card No.1063, issued by Kerala Water Authority,
Nemmara
Ext.A3 series – Water charge receipts issued by Kerala Water Authority to the
Complainant between 12/2011 to 12/2016
Ext.A4 - Demand and Disconnection Notice dated.16.12.2016 issued by Kerala Water
Authority, P.H.Sub Division, Chittur to the complainant
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties
Ext.B1 series - consumer personal ledger extract of Kerala Water Authority
relating to the complainant
Witness examined on the side of complainant
Nil
Witness examined on the side of opposite party
Nil
Cost
Nil
