Complaint filed on: 02-04-2009<br /> Disposed on: 12-07-2010<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE BANGALORE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT <br /> CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, NO.8, SAHAKARA BHAVAN, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 052 <br /> <br /> C.C.No.775/2009<br /> DATED THIS THE 12th JULY 2010<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> SRI.D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> SRI.GANGANARASAIAH., MEMBER<br /> <br /> SMT. ANITA SHIVAKUMAR. K, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> Complainant: - <br /> Smt.Rekha w/o. Sri Umesh Babu Patel,<br /> Major , R/at # 39/03 13th cross,<br /> 6th Main, Malleshwaram, Bangalore <br /> V/s<br /> Opposite party: - <br /> <br /> Bangalore Water supply and Severage <br /> Board, office of the Asst. Executive <br /> Engineer, # 1, Water supply and <br /> Sanitary (N), Sub Division, Bangalore <br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> <br /> SRI. D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT., <br /> <br /> Brief facts of the complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite party [hereinafter called as Op for short) are that, she had taken water supply connection to her residence from OP for drinking purpose only as she is having bore well water facilities. That she had received bill from OP for Rs.4893/-. Then she addressed letters to OP on 20-5-2006, 15-2-2007, 22,12,2007 seeking details of arrears, but OP have not replied. Then OP issued a notice on 11-8-2008 to pay arrears of Rs.4893/- with warning if that amount is not paid water supply will be disconnected. Then she issued a legal notice to OP for which OP have not given any reply and therefore has prayed for a direction to OP not indulge in an unfair trade practice by causing deficiency in their service, not to cut off water supply, to furnished details of arrears and award of Rs.20,00,000/-.<br /> <br /> 2. OP has appeared through his advocate and filed version admitting that the complainant is one of their consumers and receipt of letter from the complainant regarding arrears of Rs.4893/- After verifying, they saw the complainant had consumed 72000 and 70000 liters of water during January 2004 and February 2004 and thereafter as average per month was using water between 35000 to 40000 liters. But the complainant did not pay the bill amount from January to July 2004 and a cheque issued by the complainant dated 17-4-2004 for Rs.5000/- came to be bounced. Thereafter the complainant had paid Rs.3000/- towards arrears and balance of Rs.1230/- was left out. Thereafter, entire arrears of the complainant was worked out as Rs.5196/- and on the representation of the complainant, their board has completely waived, the remaining arrears and therefore denying any deficiency has prayed for dismissal of the complaint. <br /> <br /> 3. In the course of arguments, the complainant an officer of OP have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version. The complainant has produced copy of the bill dated 24-12-2008 given by OP for Rs.5198/- and copy of certain previous bills also produced, besides copies of some letters, she had addressed to OP. OP in the course of arguments has produced copy of lodger report and also copy of decision of OP board waiving the amount due from the complainant. We have heard the counsel for both the parties and perused the records. <br /> <br /> 4. In the course of arguments, the learned counsel appearing for OP by producing a copy of resolution passed by the OP board submitted that OP has waived Rs.5196/- the amount due from the complainant and nothing remains to be granted to the complainant and submitted for dismissal of the complaint. Whereas the counsel appearing for the complainant submitted that, OP on the representation of the complainant did not waive the charges earlier but caused delay therefore insisted upon for awarding compensation. <br /> <br /> 5. On perusal of the records, it is found that the complainant has not denied the counter allegation of OP that the complainant had consumed large quantity of water during January and February 2004 and continuity consumed 35000 to 40000 liters per month thereafter but had not paid the bills during that period. Thereafter the cheque dated 17-4-2004 issued by her for Rs.5000/- towards arrears of consumption charge was bounced and thereafter during February – 2005 she had paid only Rs.3,000/- had not paid balance amount. Since this statement of OP has not been controverted, the complainant shall have to be held to had fallen in arrears of water consumption charges. As both sides have not produced relevant bills right from January 2004 till date and the parties now are not referring back to that period to say whether the bill was excessive or there was arrears and as they have resolved in waiving arrears, we will have to dispose of the compliant, taking into consideration, the dispute that remains for adjudication. <br /> <br /> 6. The complainant as on the date of filing of this complaint stated that OP had claimed Rs.4893/- as arrears and she requested a direction OP to furnish details of arrears if any and thereby she had not seriously denied her liability to pay certain arrears. But OP on the representation of the complainant has waived the arrears to the extent of Rs.5196/- and submitted the documents today and thereby it is submitted that the dispute between the parties regarding arrears of water charges is resolved and no dispute remains so far as that dispute is concerned. The main dispute since is resolved amicably and this forum, since has no opportunity to go to merits of the case to determine deficiency, cannot awarded compensation as claimed by the counsel for the complainant. Therefore leaving the matter to the partiers and in view of the submission of the counsel of OP that they will not disconnect water supply to the house of the complainant and with an observation that, the complainant shall consumption charges regularly and to avoid of such dispute in feature, we pass the following order.<br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> In view of the settlement reached and the complainant has not proved deficiency in the service of OP, the complaint is dismissed. In the circumstances of the case, parties to bear their own costs. <br /> . <br /> Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 12th July 2010.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />