IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated, the 31st day of August, 2021.
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C C No. 183/2019 (Filed on 31-10-2019)
Petitioner : Mohanan Pillai R.
S/o. Raghavan Pillai,
Residing at Kailas Bhavan,
Champakkara P.O. Karukachal.
(Adv. Nithin M.K. and
Adv. Nithin Sunny Alex)
Vs.
Opposite parties : 1) Kerala Water Authority,
Rep. by the Executive Engineer,
Kerala Water Authority,
Thiruvalla.
2) The Executive Engineer,
Kerala Water Authority,
Thiruvalla.
3) The Assistant Executive Engineer,
Kerala Water Authority
P.H. Division, Changanacherry.
4) The Assistant Engineer,
Kerala Water Authority,
Nedumkunnam.
O R D E R
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
The brief of the complainant’s case is as follows.
The petitioner’s wife late Anitha Mohanan availed a domestic water connection for their residential house with number No.1/239 of Karukachal Grama Panchayath. The water connection was given on 22-04-2010 with consumer number KRL/621/D (Karukachal). The petitioner made a deposit of Rs.6,000/- before the opposite party for getting the water connection. After one month, the availability of water through the said water connection has stopped. Several complaints were made before water authority regarding the non-availability of water. All the bills issued by the opposite parties were promptly remitted. Complainant’s wife died on 20-07-2015 and the complaint and family is the consumer of the said water connection. On 21-01-2019, the complainant filed a petition before the 2nd respondent and issued copies to the 3rd and 4th respondents inviting their attention. But no steps were being taken by the opposite parties. From 23-05-2010 onwards the complainant is deprived of water through connection. The complainant had suffered severe mental agony and inconvenience due to the deficiency in service of the opposite parties. Hence this case.
On admission of the complaint, copies of the complaints were duly served to the opposite parties.
Opposite parties appeared before the Commission and 3rd opposite party filed version on behalf of all the opposite parties.
As per the version of the opposite parties, domestic water connection in No. KRL/621/D was given on 22-04-2010 in the name of Anitha Mohanan, Rs.1,062/- was paid as fee for the water connection. The location of the complainant’s house is at the end portion of Karukachal – Nethalloor – Champakara Palli – Narikuzhi road. During 2012 period, Construction Corporation conducted the reconstruction works of the Karukachal – Nethalloor-Champakkara main road. During the road work the pipe lines were damaged and pipelines under the culverts were completely removed. Consequently the water supply to the complainant’s residential area were disrupted. As per the complaint of the complainant steps were initiated by the opposite parties and letter was given to the PWD roads authorities Karukachal seeking permission, for digging the road in order to lay pipelines, across the road. But permission from PWD authorities were not given for digging the newly constructed BM and BC road. Opposite party had taken all possible efforts to solve the complainant’s problems. The shortage of water in that locality was intimated to the complainant and complainant had agreed to get the domestic connection even if water is not available and also the complainant agreed that he will not move before Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum or any other Courts even if water is not available due to technical reasons or shortage of water in that areas. There is no deficiency in service from the part of the opposite parties.
Complainant filed proof affidavit and Exts.A1 to A5 were marked. The opposite party filed proof affidavit and marked Exts.B1 and B2.
On going through the complaint, version of the opposite parties and evidence adduced. We would like to consider the following points.
- Whether there is deficiency in service from the part of the opposite parties?
- If so, what are the reliefs and costs?
For the sake of convenience, we would like to consider point No.1 and 2 together.
Point No.1 and 2
On going through the complaint, version of the opposite parties, proof affidavit of the parties, it is clear that the Anitha Mohanan, wife of the complainant had availed a domestic water connection from the opposite parties with consumer No. KRL621/D on 22-04-2010.
Ext.A2 is the consumer’s meter card which establishes that Anitha Mohanan was given a domestic water connection with consumer No.621/KCHL. The date of connection was 22-04-2010.
Ext.A1 is the provisional invoice card for consumer No.621/KCHL of Anitha Mohanan and monthly rent is fixed as Rs.42/-.
Ext.A3 is the demand and disconnection notice issued by the opposite parties in the name of Anitha Mohanan. On perusal of Ext.A3 notice we can see that the notice was issued on 13-05-2019 for the payment of Rs.5,046/-. As per Ext.A4 online receipt the complainant had remitted this amount. According to the opposite parties during 2012 period, Construction Corporation conducted the reconstruction work of Karukachal – Nethalloor – Champakkara main road. The pipelines used to give drinking water to the complainant, which situated under the culvert were damaged and the pipes from that area of the culvert were completely removed. After that the water connection towards the complainant’s area were disrupted.
Ext.B1 is the copy of the letter written by the 4th opposite party to the Assistant Engineer, PWD Section, Roads Karukachal seeking PWD permission for cutting the PWD road for laying the KWA pipelines through the culvert at Nethalloor junction. This Ext.B1 letter was written on 01-03-2018 on the reference of the letter they received from Secretary, Karukachal Gramapanchayath dtd.24-02-2018.
This clearly shows that the opposite parties were well aware of the fact that domestic water supply to the complainant’s residential area were not functioning from 2012 onwards and the complainant was not getting drinking water through his domestic water connection.
From the above discussed facts, it is clear that the opposite parties issued Ext.A3 demand and disconnection notice dtd.13-05-2019 to the complainant with the clear knowledge that they were not providing drinking water to the complainant through the domestic water connection.
Section 2 (o) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 defines Service as
“service” means service of any description which is made available to potential [users and includes, but not limited to, the provision of] facilities in connection with banking, financing insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging or both, [housing construction], entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service.
The opposite parties admits the receipt of Rs.10,621/- on 22-04-2010 being the connection fee. The domestic water connection was not given free of charge. Hence the opposite parties are legally bound to provide water to the complainant’s residence.
Opposite parties produced Ext.B2 agreement signed by Anitha Mohanan, the applicant for water connection. In the agreement, it is stated that “in any circumstances if water is not getting in the connection by regular water supply system, she will not file any petition in the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission or in any other Court in this connection”. This agreement violated the fundamental rights of an individual to seek legal remedy. This agreement is void and is of no legal validity.
Section 3 of the Kerala Water Authority (Water Supply) Regulations 1991 defines the responsibility of the Authority which reads as
Responsibility of the Authority – Except in so far as is otherwise provided in the Act or in any Rules issued thereunder or in these regulations the Authority shall be responsible for all the works connected with the supply of water to the consumers served by the Water Supply Systems vested in or transferred to or acquired by the Authority.
Except so far as is otherwise provided in the Act or in any Rules issued there under or in these regulations the Authority shall be responsible for all the works connected with the supply of water to the consumers served by the water supply vested in or transferred to or acquired by the Authority.
This shows that the opposite parties were responsible for all the works connected with the supply of water to the complainant’s domestic water connection.
Moreover on the basis of adduced evidence it is evident that the opposite parties were aware of the fact that the pipelines under the culvert, near Nethalloor Junction were removed during 2012 and water supply to the complainant’s residential area was disrupted. The opposite parties had not taken any steps to do the works to lay the pipelines under the culvert near Nethalloor Junction. It was only on 01-03-2018, the opposite parties forwarded Ext.B1 letter to the PWD authorities for getting sanction for cutting the PWD road for laying pipelines under the Culvert at Nethalloor junction. Moreover Ext.B1 letter was forwarded to PWD authorities on the reference of a letter received from the Secretary, Karukachal Grama Panchayath dated 24-02-2018. This shows the lethargic attitude of the opposite parties in performing their official responsibilities and giving justice to the consumers.
Section 2 (g) “deficiency” means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service.
From the above findings, we are of the opinion that the acts of the opposite parties by not taking any actions to do the required works for providing drinking water to the complainants from 2012 onwards which they are legally bound to do is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence Point No.1 is found in favour of the complainant. We allow the complaint and pass the following Orders.
- The opposite parties are directed to provide water through the domestic water connection in No. KRL/621/D to the complainant within 30 days from the receipt of this Order.
- The opposite parties are directed to give Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as compensation for mental agony along with cost is Rs.2,000/-
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 31st day of August, 2021.
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member Sd/-
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Smt. Bindhu R, Member Sd/-
Appendix
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant.
A1 – Copy of provisional invoice issued by 3rd opposite party
2 – Photocopy of meter card (Consumer No.KCHL)
A3 – Photocopy of demand and disconnection notice
A4 – Photocopy of online receipt dtd.29-05-19
A5 – Photocopy of death certificate
Exhibits marked from the side of opposite party
B1 – Copy of letter dtd.01-03-2018
B2 – Copy of agreement
By Order
Senior Superintendent
