DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ERNAKULAM

       Dated this the 25^th day of July, 2024

                                                                   Filed on: 26/06/2024

PRESENT

Shri.D.B.Binu                                                                          President

Shri.V.Ramachandran                                                              Member Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N                                                             Member

C.C. NO. 757/2024

COMPLAINANT

Khaleequ Zaman V.E., M.A. LLB, Subaida Manzil, Alway, Marampalli P.O., Aluva, Ernakulam 683105.

Vs.

OPPOSITE PARTY

Assistant Executive Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, NRWM Unit Water Theft Squad, Kochi 11

FINAL ORDER

D.B. Binu, President.

1. A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

The complaint was filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The complainant challenges the assessment notice from Kerala Water Authority, Notice No. 139/2024 dated 11.06.2024, demanding Rs. 8,846/- as water charges. The complainant claims that his sister, Shehanaz, has not used the alleged amount of water due to the poor water supply conditions in the Fort Kochi and Mattancheri regions. Furthermore, the notice lacks a consumer number and meter number, indicating usage through a public water tap, which is a free government supply.

Relief Claimed:

The complainant seeks Rs. 25,000/- as compensation for mental agony and hardship, and a waiver of the Rs. 8,846/- charged, totalling Rs. 33,846/-.

2. Proceedings:

The complaint was scheduled for an admission hearing on 17.07.2024. The complainant was present and argued his case. The matter is now posted for final orders.

3. Issues for Consideration:

The main points to be analyzed in this case are as follows:

1. Whether the complaint is maintainable before this Commission as per Consumer Protection Act, 2019?

                   Upon careful examination of the facts and legal precedents, the following observations and legal reasoning are made:

4. Maintainability of the Complaint:

According to Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, a consumer is defined as a person who buys any goods or hires or avails of any services for a consideration that has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment. In the present case, the complainant did not plead any contractual agreement directly between themselves and the Kerala Water Authority. There is no argument that the complainant is a beneficiary under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

As per the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruling in ONGC v. Consumer Education Research Society (2020) 2 SCC 113, the privity of a contract is essential for a consumer relationship. The Court held that if a scheme is managed by an entity’s trust and not directly by the entity itself, there is no privity of contract.

In this case, the water supply and associated charges are managed by the Kerala Water Authority, which operates under public statutory duties rather than specific contractual agreements with individual consumers. Therefore, the lack of privity of contract between the complainant and the Kerala Water Authority invalidates the claim under the Consumer Protection Act.

5. Deficiency in Service and Negligence:

To establish a deficiency in service, there must be a contractual relationship and a breach of duty. The complainant did not plead any contractual agreement directly between the Kerala Water Authority and themselves.

Given that the water supply issue affects a broader public and is managed as a statutory duty, it does not fall within the scope of deficiency in service under consumer protection laws.

6. Legal Analysis and Observations:

The complaint lacks sufficient pleading to establish that the complainant is a consumer as per the Act. The issues raised pertain more to administrative inefficiency and public utility management, which are not within the purview of this Commission.

Conclusion:

Given the absence of a direct contractual relationship and the statutory nature of the water supply duties, the complaint is not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The issues highlighted are better addressed through public grievance mechanisms rather than the consumer commission.

Order:

The complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.

Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 25^th day of July, 2024.

                                      Sd/-

D.B. Binu, President

                                                                                                Sd/-

V. Ramachandran, Member

Sd/-

Sreevidhia.T.N, Member

Forwarded/By Order

Assistant Registrar

Despatch date:

By hand:     By post                                                  

kp/

CC No. 757/2024

Order Date: 25/07/2024