By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,<br /> <br /> 1. Briefly stated the facts are as follows:-<br /> Complainant is a resident within the limits of Kadannamanna Grama Panchayat. The supply of drinking water was previously undertaken by Grama Panchayat under the Rajeev Ghandhi Drinking Water Scheme. On 11-4-2006 order was issued by Government, directing the Panchayats to constitute Gunabhokthru Samithis and to hand over the service of supply of drinking water to these Samithis. Thereby on 01-01-07 opposite party Samithi was constituted and this Samithi took over the service of supply of drinking water. All the 54 consumers under the Panahcyat continued to avail water supply under opposite party Samithi. It is for the Samithi to collect water charges and caution deposit after constitution of samithi and Panchayat cannot collect the same. That the caution deposit of 53 consumers other than the complainant is still in the hands of Panchayat. The office bearer of opposite party Samithi have not taken any steps to transfer the amount of Rs.53,000/- which is the caution deposit of 53 consumers into the account of the Samithi. To the knowledge of the complainant, all these 53 persons have defaulted in paying water charges and the amount are still in arrears. That, if the arrears of these consumers are recovered from their respective caution deposit, most of them will not have any balance in their amount deposited. Thus the situation at present is that, these consumers have no caution deposit either in panchayat or in the Samithi. Complainant used to pay water charges regularly to the Panchayat and there was no arrears. Hence be obtained refund of caution deposit of Rs.1,000/-. Now opposite party Samithi is demanding to pay caution deposit of Rs.1,000/- into the Samithi to continue to avail the services of drinking water. Complainant alleges that it is sheer injustice to demand payment of caution deposit from him, when the Samithi has not taken any steps to get transfer of the amount deposited by 53 consumers in Panchayat. He prays to restrain opposite party Samithi from demanding caution deposit from him until opposite party Samithi takes steps to recover Rs.53,000/- from the Panchayat, and also not to disconnect his water supply for non payment of caution deposit.<br /> 2. Opposite party filed version admitting that the service of drinking water supply was taken over by the Samithi from panchayat on 01-01-07 as per Government directions. Opposite party Samithi is now supplying drinking water to consumers including the complainant. After opposite party Samithi took over the service of supply of water, the supply has not been interrupted even for a single day. Caution deposit of Rs.1,000/- was collected from consumers since it is necessary to realise arrears or penalty in case of default to pay water charges or misuse of drinking water. At present there are 111 members in the Samithi who avail the services of opposite party Samithi. Out of this 54 persons including complainant were previously consumers under the Panchayat. They had deposited Rs.1,000/- each in the Panchayat as caution deposit at the time of availing water supply. The complainant filed C.C.No.22/07 before this Forum against the Panchayat praying for refund of his caution deposit. Panchayat paid the amount directly to complainant and the case was closed as settled. Though opposite party Samithi asked the complainant to deposit this amount in the Samithi, complainant has failed to do so, till date. The amount of s.53,000/- which is caution deposit of 53 consumers is still in the hands of Panchayat and opposite party Samithi is taking steps to get transfer of this amount. A consumer is bound to obey the terms and conditions framed by Samithi for smooth functioning of the Samithi as well as for the uninterrupted supply of drinking water. It was the decision of Samithi that consumers should have their caution deposit either in panchayat or in the Samithi. It is submitted that complainant should be directed to remit caution deposit of Rs.1,000/- in Panchayat or Samithi or else the Samithi will not be able to continue supply of water to complainant. That complainant has dragged the Samithi into a litigation which is totally unnecessary and baseless. That complaint may be dismissed with costs.<br /> 3. Evidence consists of affidavits filed by both sides. Exts.A1 and A2 marked on the side of complainant. Ext.B1 to B4 marked on behalf of opposite party.<br /> 4. Both sides appeared and argued the matter in person. Admittedly complainant is a consumer for supply of drinking water under opposite party Samithi. Opposite party has not case that complainant has defaulted payment of water charges. Ext.A1 series are the receipts for payment of water charges. Complainant has no case that his supply of drinking water was interrupted. His grievance regarding this complaint originated when opposite party Samithi demanded him to pay Rs.1,000/- as caution deposit to the Samithi; since complainant took refund of the deposit that was standing in the hands of Panchayat. Complainant has no case that he is not liable to pay the caution deposit. His specific contention is that opposite party Samithi shall not collect the caution deposit from him, until Samithi collects Rs.53,000/- which is caution deposit by 53 consumers in Panchayat. Ext.B1 is the Certificate of Registration of opposite party Samithi under the Societies Registration Act. Thus the Samithi being a legal body can frame its' own rules and regulations. Undisputedly such rules and regulations are necessary for the smooth functioning of any Samithi. It is a matter within the internal administration of the Samithi, to take steps to recover arrears from defaulters and to collect deposits from consumers. Admittedly complainant is liable to pay the caution deposit. Complainant wants the Samithi to collect Rs.53,000/- from the Panchayat first,and only then proceed against him for payment of his caution deposit. We do not find any merit in the contention raised by complainant. No deficiency of service is made out against opposite party. At the time of hearing several attempts were made to settle the matter. This Forum suggested to allow one months time to the complainant to deposit Rs.1,000/- in the Samithi. Complainant took an adamant attitude that he would pay the amount only after opposite party Samithi recovers Rs.53,000/- from Panchayat. We have to say that the demeanour of complainant inside the Forum was highly irascible and we are able to infer that the litigation is the outcome of some hidden enimity. Though this is a fit case to invoke Sec.26 of Consumer Protection Act, we refrain ourselves from imposing compensatory costs only considering the age of the complainant who is a Senior Citizen. We find no merits in the complaint.<br /> 5. In the result, complaint dismissed. Opposite party is at liberty to take necessary steps/action to collect caution deposit from complainant as per law. No order as to costs.<br /> Dated this 10th day of June, 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> <br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil <br /> Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 and A2<br /> Ext.A1 : Receipts (29 Nos.) from opposite party to complainant.<br /> Ext.A2 : Water Supply Scheme – Provisional Invoice Card.<br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1 to B4<br /> Ext.B1 : Photo copy of the Certificate of Registration under the <br /> Societies Registration Act XXI of 1860<br /> Ext.B2 : Photo copy of Agreement between the Grama Panchayat<br /> Secretary and Sudhajala Vitharana Upabhokthru Samithi<br /> Ext.B3 : Photo copy of the version in CC.No.22/07 submitted <br /> by opposite party before this forum.<br /> Ext.B4 : Photo copy of the settlement order copy in C.C.No.22/07 <br /> dated, 20-8-2007.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br />