IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM

Dated this the 30^thday of August, 2022

Present:  Sri. Manulal V.S. President

Smt.  Bindhu R,  Member

Sri. K.M. Anto, Member

C C No. 09/2019 (filed on 17-01-2019)

Petitioner                                          :         Selma Anil,

                                                                   Vazhachira House, 368/11,

                                                                   Santhapuram Colony,

                                                                   Muttambalam P.O.

                                                                   Kottayam - 68600        

                                                                   (Adv. Deepthy S.Nath)

                                                                                  Vs.

   Opposite Parties                                      :  1)   Kerala Water Authority,

                                                                   Rep. by its Managing Director,

                                                                   Jala Bhavan, Vellayambalam,

                                                                   Thiruvananthapuram,

                                                                   Pin 695010.

                                                              2)  Assistant Executive Engineer,

                                                                   Kerala Water Authority,

                                                                   P.H. Division, Kottayam,       

                                                                   Collectorate P.O.

                                                                   Pin – 686002.

O  R  D  E  R

Smt.  Bindhu R,  Member

The complainant has taken a domestic water connection having consumer no M02/266/D from the respondents and paid all the bills regularly without any default. On 28/12/2018 the petitioner received a notice, issued by the 2^nd opposite party dated 26.12.2018 demanding an amount of Rs.20,662/- on or before 27/1/2019 as arrears, otherwise the connection would be disconnected accompanied by a bill no 42942700 stating an arrears /advance of Rs.16574/-. Thus a total amount of Rs.20662/- was to be paid including bi monthly water charges on or before 27/01/19. But the bimonthly water charge shown as Rs.4060/- in the bill is not correct as the water consumption was very low.                       The complainant suspects that the meter is faulty. The petitioner was paying the water charges regularly without any default. In the demand cum disconnection notice, it is not mentioned that under which head the amount of Rs.16,582/- would fall. There is no basis for issuing such a bill and a notice. The notice is not legal. The act of the opposite party is against the provisions of Kerala water authority regulation 1991 and Kerala water supply swevara Act 1986. The respondent has no locus standi to issue such a notice. There is no calculation statement along with the notice is sent. So aggrieved by the deficient and unfair act of the opposite parties, the complaint is filed to set aside notice dated 26/12/18 and bill no 42942700 and for compensation.

Notice was duly served to the opposite parties and the opposite parties

appeared filed joint version.

The opposite parties raised objection to the allegations in the complaint that the water connection is admitted and the complainant remitted the water charges lastly on 4.12.17. The consumption of water by the complainant was very high. The meter readings of the previous year was given

Before serving the disconnection notice dated 25.12.2018 along with bill no 42942700, bills were issued to the complainant regularly on October 2017,December, 2017, February 2018,April 2018,June 2018,August 2018.

But the complainant remitted only an amount of Rs.1241/- on 4.12.17. At that time the complainant had a balance arrear amount of Rs.3243/- Subsequently bills were issued to the complainant regularly but she did not turn up for payment of such arrear bills. Hence the arrear amount of the complainant had been cumulated and arrear amount arrived at an amount of Rs.20662/-.The meter readings of the complainant were regularly taken. Thus the bill issued to the complainant is legal and she is bound to pay the bill amount for the water actually used by the complainant. The consumer is bound to pay the water charges she used.

The respondents had never acted against the provisions of Kerala Water Supply and Sewerage Act,1986. The opposite parties are supplying drinking water to the complainant and meter readings are regularly taken from the water connection as envisaged in section 13 of Kerala water authority (water Supply) regulation 1991.The previous meter reading present meter reading, bimonthly consumption, bimonthly water charge, previous arrears etc. are detailed in the bill issued to the complainant. Hence KWA has every right to issue the demand and disconnection notice to the complainant. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties as the issuance of bill against the consumption of water by the consumer is not a deficiency. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

The complainant has filed proof affidavit along with documents which are marked as Exhibit A1 and A2 while the opposite parties filed proof affidavit along with Exhibit B1.

Upon a detailed scrutiny of the pleadings and evidence on record, we would like to frame the issues as whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party and if so is the complainant eligible for the reliefs sought for?

The complainant alleges that the opposite parties had issued a bill demanding excess payment unlawfully which was not issued against the actual water consumption of the complainant whereas the opposite parties contented that the complainant had not paid the water charges as per the regularly issued bills and so the disputed bill was issued for the arrears.

The complainant has averred that she had paid all the charges regularly, but has not produced any receipt or other evidence to prove that she had paid the previous bills. Exhibit A1 is the demand and disconnection notice as per regulation 13.D of the Regulation dated 14.12.2018. In A1 notice the billing period is shown as 10.8.18 to 20.12.18. The previous average bill amount for two months is shown as 4060 whereas the additional amount is shown as 16582. Thus the total amount is shown as 20662/-. The arrears is shown as Rs.16,574/-. The opposite party has produced Exhibit B1 which is the consumer personal ledger of the consumer number of the complainant in which the bill adjustment is shown upto 14.11.2016. On 16.12.17 an arrears of Rs.3243 is shown. Thereafter on 6.12.17,9.2.18,6.4.18,11.6.18,7.8.18,14.12.18 amounts in arrear is shown as 3243,5772,8306,10840,14520,16574 respectively.

The total arrears amounts to 20,662/- on 14.12.2018 as per Exbt B1.

On a detailed perusal of Exhibit B1 the average consumption is shown as 1.5Kl on 20/09/2016 and 13.91 on 14/8/2017. The amount is shown as 20 and 60. But the next bill on 11.10.2017 became2020 for a consumption of 83 whereas the meter reading shows no such drastic variation. No satisfactory explanation has been given by the opposite party regarding this. In the demand column water charge is shown as below 1000 upto 09-08-2017 but for 10.10.2017 abruptly it is shown as Rs. 4044/-.The opposite party has not mentioned these facts anywhere

in the version or in the affidavit and not properly explained.

As per regulation 13 (d) of the Kerala Water Authority (Water Supply) regulations 1991, it is stipulated that if the amount remitted by the consumer is found to be in excess or short in excess or short based on the meter readings taken subsequently, the consumer shall pay to the Authority the amount short remitted and the Authority shall adjust the amount collected in excess from the consumer in the subsequent payment an adjustment bill in form no IX shall be issued once in every six months to the consumer indicating the excess or short remitted by the consumer. Here the opposite parties in their version stated that they had issued periodic bills to the consumer but she omitted to pay the amounts but no such bills have been produced before us.

Thus the opposite parties are deficient in service by not acting according to the provisions of the Kerala Water Authority (Water Supply) regulations 1991 in sending proper notice to the complainant upon nonpayment of bills in the interval of six months and issuing the bill without any proper reasoning. The issuance of Exhibit A1 and A2 all of a sudden for a huge amount is a clear deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

Thus we allow the complaint.

Hence by allowing the complaint the Exhibits A1 and A2 are set aside and we direct the opposite parties to issue new bill avoiding the penal charges and collect the exact amount of water charges from the complainant.

Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 30^th day of August, 2022.

Smt.  Bindhu R,  Member               Sd/-

Sri. Manulal V.S. President             Sd/-

Sri. K.M. Anto, Member                 Sd/-

Appendix

Exhibits marked from the side of complainant

A1 – Copy of bill dtd.14-12-15 issued by opposite party

A2 – Copy of notice dtd.25-12-18 issued by opposite party

Exhibits marked from the side of opposite party

B1 – Consumer personal ledger (consumer personal details)

                                                                                                          By Order

                                                                                                   Assistant Registrar