Present: 1. Sri.P.K.Sasi, President.
2. Smt. Sheena.V.V, Member.
3. Sri.M.P.Chandrakumar, Member
30th day of November 2016
CC.24/14 filed on 8/1/2014
Complainant : M.S.Chandrasekharan, S/o.Sankaran, Sooryakanthi,
Ayyanthole, Thrissur.
(By Adv.N.N.Geebels, Thrissur))
Opposite Parties: 1. Managing Director, Kerala Water Authority,
Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram.
2. Asst. Executive Engineer, Water Works Sub
Division, Kerala Water Authority, Thrissur.
(By Adv.Bivin Paul, Thrissur)
O R D E R
By Smt.Sheena.V.V., Member :
The case of the complainant is that the complainant is a consumer of the water authority with consumer No.AP-4. The complainant was paid water charges regularly. On 29/10/2012, the opposite parties had issued a bill to the complainant for demanding to pay Rs.4,884/- from November 2011 to May 2012 is a period of six months. The complainant is concerned there is no such consumption of water as alleged by the opposite parties during this period. As a domestic consumer the complainant is using nearly a fixed quantity of water every month and there is no excess usage of water. The opposite parties also issued an arrear bill dated 9/12/2003 and a disconnection notice dated 12/12/13. The complainant is ready to pay the amount from 6/12/12 to 2/13 which are described in the bill dated 9/12/13. So, the complainant is prayed that he is not liable to pay the bill amount dated 29/10/2012. Hence the complaint is filed to cancel the bill.
2. The opposite parties entered appearance through counsel and filed detailed version. In the version they stated that the complaint is filed only with an intention for not making any payment of water charges to the office of opposite parties for the water which have been consumed by the complainant. The complainant who is the consumer of opposite parties paid the water charges only upto 1/2011. The bills were issued to the complainant only upon the consumption of water made by him based on the meter readings. The complainant has installed a new water meter on 19/3/2010 after clearing the dues till the date. Thereafter the bill dated 1/10/2010 upto 7/10 and bill dated 1/7/11 upto 1/2011 were paid by the complainant. The meter readings after installing new meter of the complainant were on 19/3/2010 – new meter installed initial reading 419 litres, 13/4/2010 – gate locked, 16/7/2010 – 123 KL, 5/10/10- 126KL, 22/1/11 – 269 KL, 11/11/2011 – 762 KL, 12/6/12 – 797KL, 25/2/13 – 1084KL and 21/2/14 – 1558KL. So the amount was calculated legally and issued the disputed bill. The office of the opposite parties were convinced the complainant about water charges of Rs.4,884/- while he submitted the petition to the office of opposite parties. That bill was not paid by the complainant. Hence the bill dated 9/12/2013 issued for Rs.6477/-. Even though no payment have been made by the complainant and the opposite parties issued disconnection notice dated 12/12/2013. So, the issuance of bill is lawful. Hence the complaint is dismissed.
3. The points for consideration are that :
1) Whether the opposite parties are committed deficiency in service or not ?
2) If so what reliefs and costs ?
4. The case is posted for evidence, the complainant filed proof affidavit and four documents produced, which are marked as Exts.P1 to P4. Ext.P1 is the bill dated 29/10/12, Ext.P2 is the bill dated 9/12/13, Ext.P3 is the disconnection advice dated 12/12/13 and Ext.P4 is the bill dated 1/7/11. From the side of opposite parties, 2nd opposite party, Assistant Executive Engineer, Kerala Water Authority filed counter proof affidavit and one document produced which is marked as Ext.R1. Ext.R1 is the attested copy of relevant page of consumer personal ledger maintained by the office of opposite parties bearing consumer No.AP-4.
5. The complainant filed this complaint for cancellation of Ext.P1 bill. We have gone through the complaint, version, affidavit of both sides and documents. According to the opposite parties, the complaint is filed only with an intention for not making any payment of water charges. Also stated that the complainant, who is the consumer of opposite parties paid the water charges only upto 1/2011. Ext.P1 bill shows the amount and period of the water consumption. The meter readings and calculations are described in Ext.R1 document and it narrated in version, counter proof affidavit and argument note of the opposite parties.
6. As far as the complainant is concerned, there is no such consumption of water as alleged by the opposite parties during the disputed period. It could be seen from the version filed by the opposite parties and from Ext.R1, the usage of water during the preceding time and even after the disputed bill. Moreover, the water supply is concerned there is no water for 24 hours a day. During morning and in the evening water supply is there for two or three hours a day. However, the opposite parties specifically stated that, the complainant never paid any amount after 1/2001. But from the documents of the opposite parties, we could not see any issuance of demand notice by the opposite parties to demand the amount. As far as in Ext.P1 demand notice, the period, the opposite parties demanded that “11/11 – 5/12 Rs.4,884”. But from Ext.R1 document, we could see the meter readings on 11/11/2011 – 762 KL and 12/6/2012 – 797 KL, that means only 35 KL water is consumed by the complainant. So, believing the words of complainant, we could find that the complainant is not liable to pay the amount of Ext.P1 bill amount and the deficiency of service proved.
7. In the result the complaint is allowed and Ext.P1 bill stands cancelled.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 30th day of November 2016.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
M.P.Chandrakumar Sheena.V.V. P.K.Sasi, Member Member President.
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits
Ext.P1 Bill dated 29/10/12
Ext.P2 Bill dated 9/12/13 Ext.P3 is the disconnection advice dated 12/12/13 and Ext.P4 is the bill dated 1/7/11
Opposite Parties Exhibit
Ext.R1 Copy of relevant page of consumer personal ledger
Id/-
Member
