BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

Dated this the 21^st day of December 2013

Filed on : 22/02/2013

PRESENT:

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Sheen Jose, Member.

Smt. Beena Kumari V.K. Member.

CC.No. 143/2013

Between

Santha N.P., : Complainant

W/o. Harikrishna Bhagttathiri, (By Adv. M.S. Unnikrishnan,

Mithra Madom, XXII/154A, Chamber No. 319, Kerala High

Kottapuram road, Court Chamber Complex Near

Tripunithura-682 301. High Court of Kerala,

Ernakulam-18.)

Vs

Kerala Water Authority, : Opposite party

Rep. by the Assistant Executive (By Adv. P.A. Augustine,

Engineer, Sub Division, Standing counsel for Kerala

Tripunithura-682 301. Water Authority, 91, D.D.Tex

World, Market road, Kochi-11)

O R D E R

A Rajesh, President.

The case of the complainant is as follows:

The complainant availed a water connection of the opposite party on 04-11-1998. The maximum consumption of water by the complainant is 500 litre per day and the average monthly consumption of water is only 15,000 litres (15 KL). The water meter of the complainant was working properly till 18-03-2010. The opposite party went on issuing water charge bills without inspecting the water. The irregularities in the meter reading and in the calculation of average meter reading has been brought to the notice of the opposite party, but there was no response. However at the instance of the complainant the opposite party replaced the water meter on 15-09-2012 and subsequently the opposite party issued a bill for Rs. 20,270/- by taking 108 KL as average consumption. Though the complainant lodged a complaint with the opposite party, it fell on deaf ears. The opposite party forced the complainant to remit Rs. 10,000/- to avoid disconnection of the water supply. The complainant remitted the amount on 25-12-2012. The opposite party issued the bill based on the average consumption of 108 KL wrongly calculated on the basis of reading when the meter was faulty. Thus the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite party to reconsider the average consumption of the complainant on the basis of the actual consumption recorded in the replaced meter and issue revised bills for the period when the meter was faulty, to refund the excess amount paid by the complainant, not to disconnect water connection for the non-payment of disputed bills and also to pay compensation and costs of the proceedings. This complaint hence.

2. The version of the opposite party is as follows:

The complainant is a consumer of the opposite party. Her water meter was working up to 14-03-2012. The average consumption of water by the complainant during the period from 24-11-2011 to 14-03-2012 is found as 108 KL and thereafter the meter was found faulty. As per water Supply Regulation if the meter is found faulty the last average consumption is to be considered for billing till the new meter is fitted. The subsequent billing has to be made as per actual meter reading recorded in the new meter. As per the new meter the average monthly consumption of the complainant is 10.3 KL. The opposite party had issued water bill based on available water reading and previous average during the meter faulty period. The last average consumption of 108 KL was considered for billing during the period from 24-11-2011 to 13-09-2012. The complainant is liable to pay the water charges accordingly. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3. No oral evidence was adduced by the parties. Ext. A1 to A15 and B1 were marked on the side of the complainant and the opposite party respectively. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

4. The points that arose for consideration are as follows:

i. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the water charge bills set

aside and issued with revised bills.

ii. Whether the opposite party is liable to refund the excess amount

paid by the complainant?

iii. Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation and costs

of the proceedings from the opposite party?

5. Point No.i&ii. The following are the details of water charge bills issued by the opposite party to the complainant?

6.The status of the water meter of the complainant as stated in the above water charge bills would prima-facie go to show that the same had not been working properly. In Ext. A10 to A15 bills the average consumption is shown as 108 KL especially when during that period the water meter became defunct. However Exts. A1 to A3 and A5 to A9 go to show that the average consumption of water by the complainant between 08-03-2010 to 14-05-2011 was only 30 KL approximately. Admittedly the dispute of the complainant regarding the consumption of water and the excess reading in the meter started from 22-07-2011 till the replacement of the defective meter. Both the parties did not raise any hue and cry against the meter readings between 28-01-2011 to 22-07-2011. We think that the issuance of a revised bill for the disputed period based on the admitted meter reading is enough to abate the agony of the complainant. In disputably the complainant is legally liable to pay the water charges from 13-09-2012 onwards the date of replacement of the water meter.

7. Point No. iii. The plea of grievances has been met squarely by the above order, so we refrain from awarding compensation and costs of the proceedings.

8. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct as follows:

i. We set aside the bills issued by the opposite party to the

complainant from 22-07-2011 to 13-09-2012.

ii. The opposite parties shall issue a revised bill for the period from

22-07-2011 to 13-09-2012 (the date of replacement of the water

meter) taking the average consumption of water by the

complainant from 28-01-2011 to 22-07-2011.

iii. The complainant shall pay the water charge bills as per the

readings in the water meter replaced on 13-09-2012.

iv. The opposite party shall adjust the remittances made by the

complainant with the future bills as the case may be.

The above said order shall be complied with within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 21^st day of December 2013.

Sd/-A. Rajesh, President.

Sd/- Sheen Jose, Member.

Sd/-Beena Kumari V.K., Member.

Forwarded/By Order,

Senior Superintendent.

Appendix

Complainant’s Exhibits.

Ext. A1 : Copy of consumer bill

dt. 08/03/2010

A2 : Copy of consumer bill

dt. 20-05-2010

A3series : Copies of bills

A4 : Copy of letter dt. 02-12-2010

A5 : Copy of consumer bill

dt. 25-03-2011

A6 : Copy of consumer bill

dt. 06-05-2011

A7 : Consumer bill dt. 06-11-2011

A8 : Copy of consumer bill

dt. 02/03/2012

A9 : Copy of consumer bill

dt. 06/11/2011

A10 : Copy of Consumer bill

Dt. 27/06/2012

A11 : Copy of consumer bill

dt. 22/06/2012

A12 : Copy of consumer bill

dt.20-10-2012

A13 : Copy of Meter test certificate

A14 : Copy of consumer bill

dt. 26/12/2012

A15 : Copy of consumer bill

dt. 27/04/2013

Opposite party’s exhibits :

Ext. B1 : Meter Replacement Details