IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 19thday of August, 2022
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C C No. 64/2021 (filed on 20-03-2021)
Petitioner : E.I. Joseph,
S/o. E V Iype,
Ettukadavil,
Thazhathangady P.O.
Kottayam – 686005.
(Adv. Sajan A. Varghese)
Vs.
Opposite Party : Kerala Water Authority,
Kottayam Section,
P.H. Sub Division,
Collectorate P.O.
Kottayam – 686002.
Rep. by its Asst. Executive Engineer
(Adv. K.M. George)
O R D E R
Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Case of the complainant is as follows:
Complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties vide consumer number m27/47/D and consumer id.2355123094. The complainant used to make payments in advance in the course of his bill payments so that the subsequent bill amounts could be adjusted with the balance of the previous period. That the complainant had a sum of Rs.465/- as advance from the previous payment with the opposite party as on 17-11-20 and deducting the amount payable for the relevant period being 362 as compensation charges an amount of Rs.103/-is with the opposite party as advance in the previous bill adjustment column for the bills payable on the next payment. On 8-1-21 the complainant received a bill from the opposite party stating that a sum of Rs.6012/- is due from the complainant towards previous bill adjustments and deducting the advance of Rs.103/- a sum of Rs.5917/- is shown as additional amounts payable.
It is averred in the complaint that the readings on the meter installed by the opposite party on 17-11-20 shows a reading of 1771 and the usage is seen as 145(KL) for the relevant period.
The meter reading on 8-1-21 is seen as 1794and the usage for the relevant period being 23(KL). Though the complainant had filed a complaint on 18-1-21 with the Assistant Executive Engineer, Kottayam no reply was made by the opposite party. On 20-2-21 the complainant received an undated letter from the
opposite party requiring him to pay the bill amount before 28-2-21 . The said letter would also state that revenue recovery proceedings would be initiated by the opposite party .The said act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint.
Upon notice opposite parties appeared before the Commission and filed version as follows:
The domestic connection vide consumer no. M/27/47/D is given in the name of E.J.Joseph Ettukadavil, Thazhathangadi . He remitted the water charge lastly on 1-7-2020. Except two months during the covid period (5/20,9/20), bi-monthly reading has been recorded and the bills have been issued till 3/21. Rs.6,074/- is due from the complainant till 3-21. The meter reading of the complainant from 12-11-2019 to 12-3-21 is as follows:
Date Meter Reading Monthly consumption
12-11-19 1361 6.5KL
9-1-20 1378 8.5 KL
9-3-20 1397 9.5 KL
8-7-20 1457 15.8 KL
17-11-20 1771 72.36 KL
8-1-21 1794 11.5 KL
12-3-21 1806 6 KL
The bill was issued to the complainant as per the previous reading on 17-11-20. The difference between the consumption on 8-1-21 and 17-11-21 is calculated in bill issued in January 2021. There was no leakage on the water connection and the meter was in perfect working condition. The opposite party has issued the bill in accordance with the law. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
Complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and exhibits A1 to A4 were marked. Opposite party filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and marked exhibits B1 to B3 from the side of the opposite parties.
(1)Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
(2) If so what are the reliefs and costs
Point number one and 2 together.
There is no dispute on the fact that the complainant is consumer of the opposite party by availing a domestic water connection from the opposite party vide consumer no. M/27/47/D. The specific case of the complainant that the complainant had a sum of Rs.465/- as advance from the previous payment with opposite party as on 17-11-20 . Exhbit A1 is the bill issued to the complainant by the opposite party on 17-11-20. On perusal of exhibit A1 we can see that the meter reading of the complainant as on 13-11-20 was 1771/-. As per the Exhibit A1 the bi–monthly water charge of the complainant is 362and after deducting the said amount from the advance amount paid by the complainant Rs.103/- is carried forwarded to the next bill. It is alleged in the complaint that even though there was as advance payment of amount of Rs.103 the opposite party illegally issued
Exhibit A2 bill demanding the payment of Rs.6012/- including an additional amount of Rs.5917/-. On perusal of exhibit A2 we can see that the bi monthly water charge of the complainant is as Rs.95/- and Rs.5,917/- is shown as Additional amount.
Complaint was resisted by the opposite party stating that except two months during the covid period(5/20,9/20), bi-monthly reading has been recorded and the bills have been issued till 3/21 and Rs.6,074/- is due from the complainant till 3-21. Exhibit B1 is the consumer personnel ledger of the complainant.
On perusal of demand column of exhibit B1 we can see that the opposite party has not made any demand as there was no arrears from the complainant till 12-11-20. It is proved by the history of collection in Exhibit B1 that there was no arrears from the complainant till 1-7-20. The opposite party contended that as per exhibit B1 there was an increase in the consumption of the complainant from 8-7-20 to17-11-20. However on perusal of Exhibit A1 which is the bi-monthly bill issued by the opposite party on 12-11-20 we can see that the water charge for the complaint for the period from 6-7-20 to 12-11-20 is only Rs.362 and as per Demand history if Exhibit B1 it is shown as Rs.370. Moreover on perusal of exhibit B1 it can be seen that the consumption of the complainant for the period of 9-3-20 to 8-7-20 was 15.8kl and there was no shortfall of payment towards the water charge from the complainant. Thus we cannot accept the contention of the opposite party that they have issued the bill on 17-11-20 based on the previous reading which was recorded on 8-7-20.
The Commission is of the view that when a bill is issued, covering the dues relating to a longer period/prior period, it is for the opposite party to give explanation /details in the bill itself or by adding a separate explanatory sheet of how the amount has been arrived at. This is intended to give a clear picture, as to how the amount has been worked out. However, Ext. A2 without any details has naturally led to doubts about the bill amount to the complainant, which still remains unexplained without proper clarification.
3. A review of Exts.B1 consumption of the complainant during the previous months of 11/20, 7/20, 3/20, 1/20, 7/19, 4/19, shows that the average bi-monthly bill amount, as per the B1, comes to only less than Rs.100/- whereas, as per the present bill, the additional amount is Rs.5917. This gives doubt to the commission also, as to the genuineness of the bill.
Considering all the above and considering the fact that the genuineness of the bill has not been proved even before the commission, we are inclined to think that the argument of the complainant is genuine. We are therefore bound to think in favour of the complainant.
- In the result, Ext.A2 “Demand cum Disconnection notice” for Rs.6,012/- is ordered as cancelled.
- An amount of Rs.3000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) is also sanctioned as compensation and costs to the complainant, to be paid within a month of the receipt of this order.
The Order shall be complied within the period of 30 days from the date of receipt of Order. If not complied as directed, the compensation amount will carry 9% interest from the date of Order till realizaiton.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 19th day of August, 2022.
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member Sd/-
Appendix
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant
A1 – Copy of demand and disconnection notice dtd.12-11-20
A2 - Copy of demand and disconnection notice dtd.08-01-2021
A3 – Copy of letter dtd.18-01-21 from D.J. Joseph to the opposite party
A4 – Notice issued by opposite party to petitioner
Exhibits marked from the side of opposite party
B1 – Consumer personal ledger (Cons. No.2355123094)
By Order
Assistant Registrar
