BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI Dated this the 30th day of October, 2009
Present: SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No.61/2009 Between Complainants : 1. Mariyamma W/o Varghese, Kunnamkottu House, Thonithadi Kara Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 2. K.A.Johny, Kunnamkottu House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 3. George Mathew, Vattakkunnel House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 4. K.S.Sebastian, Kozhikkottu House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 5. Joseph Joseph, Ambattu House, Mattukatta Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki Village. 6. Chacko Kurian, Chemmanam, Kaniyamparambil House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 7. Joseph Varkey, Mattathil House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 8. N.M.Joseph, Nedumpallikunnel House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 9. Sabu George, Vallayil House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 10. James Joseph, Kochuparambil House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 11. Chinnamma Kurian, Kodikkulathu House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 12. T.M.Mathew, Thannipathiyil House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 13. A.T.Thomas, Ezhacheril House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. 14. Suresh P.K, Puthusseriyil House, Thonithadi Kara, Ayyappancoil Village, Idukki District. (All by Adv: Prazeeda.K.Pillai) And Opposite Parties : 1. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, Sub Division, Kattappana, Idukki District. (By Adv: G.Premnath & Lissy M.M) (cont..3)
2. The Project Director, Poverty Alleviation Unit, District Panchayath, Painavu P.O, Idukki. 3. The Executive Engineer, District Panchayath, Painavu P.O, Idukki. 4. The Block Development Officer, Block Panchayath Office, Kattappana P.O. 5. The Assistant Engineer, Block Panchayath Office, Kattappana P.O. O R D E R SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT) The complainants 1 to 14 are the residents of Ayyappancoil Grama Panchayath and having water connection from the 1st opposite party for their domestic purposes from 1998 onwards. Consumer numbers of each persons are mentioned as Mariyamma Varghese M-99, K.A. Johny M-101, George Mathew M-48, K.S. Sebastian M-39, Joseph Joseph M-104, Chacko Kurian M-94, Joseph Varkey M-91, N.M. Joseph M-191, Sabu George M-195, James Joseph M-97, Chinnamma Kurian M-186, T.M. Mathew M-193, A.T. Thomas M-155 and Suresh P.K. M-132. Each complainant had deposited Rs.500/- with the 1st opposite party and they were getting water from the date of connection. While so on 12.02.2008 the maintenance work of the road was done by Idukki District Panchayath and destroyed the pipe lines through which the water was given to the complainants. So from 12.02.2008 onwards the complainants are not getting water through the house connection for their domestic purposes. So the complainants are taking water for their daily uses directly from Periyar, using big cans. The complainants had spent a huge amount for the transportation of water collected from Periyar. Since during this summer also there is scarcity of water, more amounts would have to spent for getting enough water for the complainants domestic purposes. Many representations were given by the complainants before the 1st opposite party. Till date no steps were taken by the opposite party to reconnect the water supply. There are more than 60 families depend upon the water supply of the opposite party. So this petition is filed for getting reconnection of the water supply and also for compensation.
2. As per the written version filed by the opposite party, there is an order from the Managing Director of the opposite party on 01.07.2009 stating that their office functioning has been divided into project and maintenance. So the maintenance of the disputed area has been shifted into Nedumkandam-Painavu section. It is admitted that there was a drinking water pipe line going through Ayyappancoil-Vikaspadi route owned by the opposite party. There were more than 30 domestic connections given including that of the complainants and five public taps were also fitted. According to the poverty alleviation project of the District Panchayath in March 2008, the maintenance work of the road was conducted with JCB, Hitachi etc. The water connection fitted in the road including that of the complainants were destroyed due to that. It needed 250 meters of new pipe line to re-establish this connections and public taps. The opposite party has taken an estimate regarding the same and given to the District Panchayath and if it is allotted from the District Panchayath, the opposite party is ready to give reconnection to the complainants and they are ready to exempt the water charge of the complainants up to that the period. So there is no deficiency in the part of the 1st opposite party. 3. As per the written version filed by the 2nd and 5th opposite party, the maintenance work of the Ayyappancoil-Vikaspadi route in Kattappana Block has been entirely finished. At the time of the work, letter was given to get estimate from concerned department for transferring the Electric post, Telephone cables, pipe lines stand in the way of the work. So the estimate was given from the Assistant Executive Engineer, Water Authority Kattappana as DB2/54/07 dated 11.10.2007 for Rs.4,92,000/- for transferring the pipe lines in the same road. In that estimate the following pipes were newly included. 100 mm A.C. 158 meter, 100 mm G1 5 meter, 40 mm G1 189 meter, 32 mm G1 140 meter, 20 mm G1 90 meter. Moreover the following pipes were included for re-fixing such as 100 mm G1 25 meter, 40 mm G1 945 meter, 32 mm G1 700 meter, 20 mm G1 480 meter, 100 mm CID Joint 158 Nos. In that estimate an amount of Rs.4,36,436/- was given as demand draft as DD No.255134 dated 25.04.2008 in the name of Assistant Engineer Kattappana from the fund of the District Panchayath. After paying the amount for shifting, the concerned department are authorized to do the work. There is no report stating that the contractor has destroyed the same. So the concerned department are duly responsible for the construction work of the demolished pipe lines of the complainants and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the 1st opposite party.
4. As per the written version of the 3rd opposite party, the Divisional Executive Engineer Local Self Government Idukki, it is stated that the maintenance work of the road has not undertaken under the supervision of this office and this office has no responsibility for the destruction of pipe lines resulting for the same. They have neither met the Assistant Engineer PH section, Kerala Water Authority Kattappana, at the working site nor discussed anything relating this complaint.
5. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainants are entitled to? 6. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1(series) to P4 marked on the side of the complainants and no oral evidence adduced from the part of the opposite parties.
7.The POINT:- The petition is filed for getting re-connection of the domestic water connection of the complainants which were demolished due to maintenance of the road work. The second complainant was examined as PW1. PW1 is having a water connection from the opposite party on 1998 onwards. The consumer number of PW1 is M-101. The provisional invoice card of PW1 is marked as Ext.P1(2). The water connection was disconnected due to maintenance work of the road on 12.12.2008, so PW1 and the other petitioners are not getting water from 12.12.2008 onwards. They are carrying water from Periyar directly by using big cans for their day-today needs. Huge amount is needed for carrying water in the scarcity period. Even though several representations were given to first opposite party. They never did anything for the re-connection of the same. Each complainant need an average of 150 liters of water per day for domestic purposes of their family. For collecting the above quantity of water, they altogether and other consumers are spending Rs.200 per day as transportation charges for 300 days. Since there was no rain during the last days, they spend an amount of Rs.90,000/- has transportation charges for collecting water. So they are entitled to get compensation of Rs.45,000/- as charges for collecting water from Periyar. Ext.P2(series) is the consumer meter cards on 3rd, 4th, 10th, and 8th petitioners. The receipt issued from the opposite party for payment of the water bill is Ext.P3. Ext.P4 is also the copy of receipt issued to the 10th complainant. So they are paying the water bill promptly. PW1 was cross examined by the learned counsel for the opposite party. As per cross examination PW1 agreed that the work was done by the opposite party and 2250 meters of pipe lines were destructed by using JCB work. The 1st opposite party suggested that 6.5 lakhs rupees is needed for the re-construction of the demolished pipes that should be allotted from OP2 to OP5. So letters were issued on 01.11.2008, 19.11.2008, 29.11.2008, and on 16.12.2008 describing the same. The destruction of the pipe lines were caused because of the act of the OP2 to OP5 and so they are only responsible for the same. It is admitted by all opposite parties that the domestic water connection of the complainants 1 to 14 were destroyed due to maintenance work of the road by the 2nd opposite party. As per 1st opposite party, destruction was caused due to the joint maintenance work done by the OP2 to OP5 and so they are responsible for the re-construction of the same. The fund should be allotted from the District Panchayath for the reconstruction work. But as per the written version of the 2nd opposite party, they have alloted Rs.4,36,486/- as demand draft to the 1st opposite party for the reconstruction of the work of the water connection. As per the Executive Engineer, Idukki the work was not under the supervision of this office and they are not responsible for the same. As per the 1st opposite party, 6.5 lakhs rupees is needed for the reconstruction of the demolished pipe lines, and OP2 to OP5 are responsible for the same. The OP1 can do the work only if OP2 to OP5 disbursed the fund for the same. This is not challenged by the opposite parties 2 to 5. As per the written version of the opposite parties 2 and 5, they have allowed a draft of Rs.4,36,486/- for the reconstruction work of the first opposite party. So we think that even though an amount of Rs.4,36,000/- is disbursed from the 2nd opposite party for the reconstruction of work, the 1st opposite party did not do anything for the same to the complainants, which is a gross deficiency in service from the part of the opposite parties. Hence the opposite parties 1 to 5 are responsible for doing the reconstruction work of the complainants' water connection. Complainants are promptly paying the water bills and they are spending a huge amount for the transportation of water from Periyar directly. About 60 families are suffering from the same. In high range area if there is scarcity of water, they have to spend more money for the collection of water. As per the complainant Rs.45,000/- is needed for the same. So we think that the complainants' only source of water for their day-today activities is from the water connection issued from the opposite party. Hence the opposite parties 1 to 5 should do the necessary steps to re-connect the water connection of the complainants 1 to 14 within 3 months and it is fit to award a compensation of Rs.2,000/- to the complainants for the inconvenience and expenses caused to them.
Hence the petition allowed. The opposite parties 1 to 5 are directed to do the necessary steps to reconnect the domestic water connection of the complainants within 3 months of the date of this order. The opposite parties 1 to 5 are directed to pay a compensation of Rs.2,000/- each to the complainants 1 to 14 for the deficiency in service, expenses for inconvenience caused to them due to the non-availability of water and Rs.2,000/- as cost of the petition within one month of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of October, 2009 Sd/- SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT) Sd/- I agree SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER) Sd/- I agree SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER) APPENDIX Depositions : On the side of Complainants : PW1 - K.A.Johny On the side of Opposite Parties : Nil Exhibits: On the side of Complainants: Ext.P1(series) - Provisional Invoice Cards(10 Nos) Ext.P2(series) - Photocopy of Consumer Cards of 3rd, 4th, 10th and 8th complainants Ext.P3 - Photocopy of Receipt for Rs.233/- issued by the opposite party Ext.P4 - Photocopy of Receipt issued to the 10th complainant On the side of Opposite Parties: Nil
| | HONORABLE Sheela Jacob, Member | HONORABLE Laiju Ramakrishnan, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE Bindu Soman, Member | |
