DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

150-151; COMMUNINTY CENTER ; C-BLOCK; JANAK PURI; NEW DELHI

CASE NO. 166/17

Amar Singh Kashyap (Senior Citizen)     R/o E-134, Arya  Samaj Raod,Uttam Nagar  Delhi-110059                                                                                                                                                                                                                               …….. Complainant

 VERSUS

Zonal Engineer –II/Z.R.O(West-I). Delhi Jal Board( West Circle) (Govt. of Delhi) C-2 Janak Puri,  New Delhi-110058.                                                                                                                                                                                       …..Opposite  Party

O R D E R

K.S. MOHI, PRESIDENT

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant  is the  owner of  premises No. E-134, Arya Samaj Raod, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059 and user of water connection No. 699975100 registered in the name of Pritam Singh  previous owner  of the premises   and regular water bills  have been raised and paid. However, due to privatization  of Delhi Jal Board  there was no reading  of water connections and raised  wrong and fictitious  reading that is                         R-7760/OK  on 29.12.2016  and R-1792/OK  on 11.03.2017  having  no ground for demand of previous arrears  to the tune of Rs. 9356/-. Previously   water connection bill  used to be  less  than Rs. 1,000/-. The complainant  prayed  that impugned  bill to the tune of Rs. 9,356 /-  should be  quashed.    

Notice of the complaint  was  issued  to the  OP   for appearance  but  OP  failed to  put up appearance  as a result  OP was proceeded  ex-parte on 16.05.2018.

Complainant was asked to file evidence he has filed his ex-parte evidence by way of  affidavit  testifying all the facts stated in the complaint.  Written submission has also been filed by the complainant.

        We have heard complainant in person and perused the record.

        On 24.08.2018 during the course of argument complainant  appeared  in person  and submitted that though  the impugned  demand as indicated in the complaint raised by  OP stand  withdrawn / vitiated  by the OP but complainant  should be  reasonably  compensated  for inconvenience  and harassment.  The record of this case  would show  that previously the complainant  used to receive bills for  water connection  even of  less than  of Rs. 1,000/-  but all of  a sudden  exorbitant  demands of Rs. 6,356/-  was raised  without taking  the actual  reading of water consumption  by the complainant which led to the  filing of the present complaint. With great efforts and reminders sent by complainant, the OP  has withdrawn  the  impugned  water consumption demand.  The complainant,  who is a  senior citizen, had to knock the doors of this Forum  which caused him a lot of inconvenience and harassment.

Keeping in view the circumstances  stated above  we are of the opinion  that it would  meet the ends of the justice if the OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards  harassment, inconvenience and litigation expenses to the complainant.  

Copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.

   File be consigned to the record room. 

  Announced this___30^th  ___ day of __August_______ 2018.

                                                                                                                       ( K.S. MOHI )                                                    (PUNEET LAMBA)                                                                                        PRESIDENT   

    MEMBER