PBEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Dated this the 27th day of August 2012
Filed on : 10/01/2012
Present :
Shri. A Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member
C.C. No. 13/2012
Between
C.I.J Tharakan, : Complainant
Chirammal house, (party-in-person)
Puthanpally,
Varappuzha-683 517.
And
The Chief Engineer, : Opposite party
Kerala Water Authority, (party-in-person)
Madhyamekhala,
Hospital road,
Kochi-682 011.
O R D E R
A Rajesh, President.
The case of the complainant is as follows:
The water connection availed by the complainant bearing No. K 1916 N was disconnected by the opposite party on 04-03-1992. The said connection was re-connected in 1995 after remitting a sum of Rs. 15,117/- towards arrears till the date of disconnection. Thereafter on 20-10-1995 the complainant remitted Rs. 3,320/- towards water charges. Thereafter the premises remain unoccupied. On 19-02-2002 at the request of the complainant the opposite party disconnected the water connection. On 24-03-2002 the water meter was taken away by miscreants. The facts being so on 27-07-2009 the opposite party issued a water charge arrear bill to the complainant to the tune of Rs. 34,406/- till 31-05-2009. Again the complainant was served with a bill dated 02-08-2011 for Rs. 51,117/-. The complainant is not liable to pay any amount to the opposite party. Thus the complainant is before us seeking the following reliefs against the opposite party.
a. to direct the opposite party to refund Rs. 15,117/- which had been remitted in February 1992 with 2% interest p.m.
b. to direct the opposite party to refund Rs. 3,130/- Rs. 15/- and Rs. 65/- respectively remitted by the complainant on 19-02-2002
c. to declare that the complainant is not liable to pay any further amount to the opposite party.
2. The version filed by the opposite party is as follows.
The water connection was granted under non-domestic category on 11-06-1986. On 04-03-1992 the connection was temporarily disconnected for want of non-remittance of water charges. An arrear bill to the tune of Rs. 15,117/- was served on the complainant, but he did not remit the same. Thereafter the said amount was reduced to Rs.3,310/- and the complainant remitted the same amount on 20-10-1995. The said connection was reconnected with effect from 23-03-2000. Again on 19-02-2002 the complainant availed an application to apply for disconnection, but neither did he submit the application nor remit the up-to-date dues. The complainant has not remitted any water charges after the reconnection on 23-03-2000. So the connection was disconnected on 23-03-2006 and notices have issued to the complainant to remit the water charge arrear. The complainant is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 69,999/- as in February 2012.
3. Proof affidavit has been filed by the complainant. Exts. A1 to A14 were marked on his side. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the opposite party. Heard the complainant who appeared in person and the counsel for the opposite party.
4. The points that arose for consideration are
i. Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of the
amounts as claimed by him from the opposite party.
ii. Whether the complainant is liable to pay any amount towards
water charge arrear to the opposite party. ?
5. Point No. i & ii. Firstly, according to the complainant he remitted a sum of Rs. 15,117/- in 1995 which was not accounted for. The opposite party vehemently disputed the remittance of the amount. Admittedly for want of evidence to the same we are not to go by the contention of the complainant. So we have no hesitation to hold that he is not at all entitled to get refund of the amount.
6. Secondly the complainant contented that he had remitted Rs. 3,130/- when he approached the opposite party on 19-02-2002 to disconnect the water connection. He has failed to prove the said remittance either before this Forum. Not to mention he is not entitled to get refund of the amount from the opposite party.
7. The dispute between the parties arises from 23-03-2000 the date of reconnection of the water connection. According to the complainant he filed a complaint before the police station that his water meter was stolen from the premises. At his instance the police issued a certificate on 02-04-2002 to that effect. The opposite party maintains that the complainant has not remitted any amount after the reconnection of the water connection on 23-03-2000. They stated that they have disconnected the water connection only on 23-05-2006 and therefore the complainant is liable to pay the water charges from 23-03-2000 to 23-05-2006 and penal charges to the opposite party.
8. It is noticeable that the complainant does not have a case that he had remitted any charges from the date of reconnection on 23-03-2000. Ext. A7 report of the Kalamassery police goes to show that the water meter of the complainant had been stolen from the premises of; the complainant on 24-03-2002. It is of pertinence to note that the opposite party failed to produce any document in this Forum to show the consumption of water by the complainant for reasons of their own. Moreover the opposite party has not issued any periodical water charge bills or arrear bills to the complainant till issue of the disputed bill. The issuance of the impugned bill as a bolt from the blue itself amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party if not spoken therefore. However the complainant is failed to pursue his application in time for disconnection of the water connection which he had allegedly submitted application for the same.
9. To set things right we pass the following order
i. We set aside the impugned bill issued by the opposite party to the complainant for reasons stated.
ii. The opposite party shall issue a fresh bill to the complainant treating the consumption of water as minimum for the period from 23-03-2000( the date of reconnection ) to 24-03-2002 (the date on which the water meter had been stolen,) without any interest from 24-03-2002 within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
iii. If the complainant fails to remit the fresh bill as per the above direction within 30 days from the date of receipt of the above bill the opposite party is at liberty to proceed as per law.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 27th day of August 2012.
Sd/- A Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
Appendix
Complainant’s exhibits :
Ext. A1 : copy of letter dt.02-06-2011
A2 : Copy of letter dt. 02-08-2011
A3 : copy of bill dt. 01-09-1995
A4 : Receipt dt. 21-11-1995
A5 : copy of letter dt. 02-08-2011
A6 : Receipt dt. 19-02-2002
A7 : Certificate dt. 02-04-2002
A8 : copy of receipt dt. 21-11-1995
A9 : letter dt. 27-04-2009
A10 : Copy of letter dt. 23-02-2011
A11 : “ “
A12 : copy of letter dt. 07-10-2011
A13 : copy of addressed cover
A14 : Copy of minutes dt. 11/11/2011
:
Opposite party’s Exhibits : : Nil
