(As per A.A.Jain, Honorable Member)
Complainants filed this complaint against Opposite Party for seeking various relief as per prayer clause .-
1. Complainant case in short is that he is the consumer of Opposite Party having Consumer No. DR1689. The complainant has taken water connection for domestic purpose and this water supply connection was of 15mm. Since last year defect occurred in water meter provided to the complainant due to which it shown excess reading. As the said meter was faulty and defective, complainant repeatedly requested orally to the Opposite Party to change the meter or rectify the defect in the said meter but no action taken by Opposite Party . Opposite Party has issued water bill to complainant on 10-01-2008 demanded Rs.15,410/- towards arrears Rs.14,539/- and current water charges Rs.867/- . Complainant submits that this bill was not proper and totally false. Complainant has not paid amount demanded in it. On 28-01-2008 opposite party has disconnected water supply of complainant without giving him any notice. Thus the complainant was constrained to erect borewell for purpose of water and he has to bear expenditure of Rs.40,000/- . Complainant prayed to direct O.P. to restore the water supply connection of complainant and quash and set aside water bill dated 10-01-2008 and grant compensation of Rs.45,000/- towards mental and physical agony plus cost of the case. (Exh.1)
2. In response to notice under Section 13 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Opposite Party appeared and filed his reply. (Exh.7) . Opposite Party denied all allegations of complainant. Opposite Party submitted the water meter was installed at premises of complainant at his cost and was under control and care of complainant. Opposite Party denied that due to defective meter excess consumption of water is ever shown. Opposite Party submitted that he has issued correct bill for water charges plus surcharge and interest as per Government Rules, terms and conditions. Opposite Party also denied that he has without giving intimation disconnected the water supply of complainant for non-payment of arrears water bill. Opposite Party admitted the issuance of notice only but denied false allegations. Opposite Party submit as per record that complainant has made payment lastly on 29-01-2004 of Rs. 2021/- out of Rs.2999/- as the Opposite Party have intimated a amnesty scheme i.e. “Nirbhay Yojana” for the recovery of arrears. As per Scheme Opposite Party waved of Rs.987/- as delayed payment charges. Opposite Party submit that up to 28-01-2008 a total arrears comes up to Rs.16,936/- till the date of disconnection. Opposite Party denied that complainant never requested about faulty meter or he can replace the meter at his cost, Opposite Party further submit that he has issued average bills as per previous consumption of water, then he has issued flat bill as per government rules. Hence O.P. requested to dismiss the complaint with heavy cost.
3. On hearing argument of Opposite Party and thoroughly verifying all the records produced by both the parties only one point arise for our consideration is that whether complainant is entitled for any relief as prayed and our finding is complaint “Partly allowed “ due to following reasons :-
REASONS
4 In this case complainant was failed to pay the water supply bills to Opposite Party since 29-01-2004. When complainant consumed the water of Opposite Party he is duty bound to be well aware about the bills and their payments. At this juncture, it will not be out of place to take aid of Sr. No. 13 (2) of the byelaws of Opposite Party which runs as under :- Sr.No.13(2) “In the case of any dispute where the consumer feels that the charges are more, he shall first make the payment of the bills under protest and than file a complaint to the Engineer in charge.”
But complainant failed to do this. Complainant has assured for payment but he has not done the payment to opposite party.
5 Opposite Party has recovered the water bill charges on 29-01-2004 which was for consuming water up to October-November 2003. Complainant get the benefit of “Nirbhaya Yojana” by deducting late payment charges of Rs.978/-. After this April-May 2004 due to faulty meter average charges bill was sent. Then flat rate Rs.396/- for 2 months bill was sent. Due to increase in the rate of water charges plus surcharge plus interest as per directives of Govt. Department, water bill was enhanced.
6 If water meter was faulty than it can be changed by complainant after permission of opposite party and ISI mark’s meter can be installed. It was not proved by the complainant that due to deficiency in service of O.P., complainant has dug the well for his domestic use. But Opposite Party supplying the filter water which is beneficial for health. So without going to the complication of rules on humanity ground complainant should be given relief for not recovering interest.Hence we proceed to pass following order.:
ORDER
1 Complaint is partly allowed.
2 Water bill dt.10-01-2008 is hereby quashed.
3 Opposite Party is directed to issue fresh bill of water to complainant which carry only water charges, surcharge but no any interest should be charged. Complainant is directed to pay the fresh bill.
4 After payment of this bill, opposite party is directed to connect the water supply of complainant and also permit complainant to change the meter.
5 No order as to cost.
