BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 13/09/2010

Date of Order : 30/06/2011

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.

Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

C.C. No. 489/2010

Between

 

And

O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. The facts of the complainant's case are as follows :

The complainant is a consumer of the 3^rd opposite party under domestic category. The connection was availed in the year 2007. The connection was in the name of the previous owner of the house. Since the complainant was working abroad, there was only a meager consumption of water. While so, when the complainant approached the 3^rd opposite party for change of ownership of the water connection, the 3^rd opposite party issued a bill for Rs. 21,317/-. In order to obtain the ownership changed, the complainant had to remit Rs. 18,763/- on 01-10-2009 after deducting the prepaid amount. The meter was faulty at that time and the additional bill was issued on the basis of the reading recorded in the faulty meter. The meter was replaced on 19-02-2010. At that time, the 3^rd opposite party had collected Rs. 5,935/- more. Subsequent to the replacement of the meter, the consumption came down drastically. On 27-07-2010, the complainant submitted a request to the 2^nd opposite party to reassess the water charges with retrospective effect on the basis of the new meter reading. But there was no reply. The complainant is legally entitled to get the reassessment of the water charges with retrospective effect and also entitled to get refund of the amount remitted by the complainant. Hence this complaint.

2. Version of the opposite parties :

The ownership of the connection was transferred in the name of the complainant with effect from 04-02-2008. The water charges upto September 2009 was prepared on the basis of the reading on 18-09-2009 and 01-10-2009. The complainant remitted the amount of Rs. 18,763/-. The water meter was found not working on 18-02-2010. Accordingly, the meter was replaced on 19-02-2010 and the complainant remitted the balance water charge of Rs. 5,935/- without any objection. The opposite parties are not liable to refund the amount remitted by the complainant. The complainant had not submitted any request to reassess the water charges. The complainant is not entitled to get any of the reliefs sought for in the complaint.

3. No oral evidence was adduced by the parties. Exts. A1 to A5 and B1 to B4 were marked on the side of the complainant and the opposite parties respectively. Ext. X1 also was marked. Heard the counsel for the parties.

4. The only point that comes up for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to get reassessment of the water charges with retrospective effect on the basis of the new meter reading? Before this Forum, both the parties were amenable for a settlement suggested by the Forum. The opposite party agreed to issue a bill taking the long average of the water consumption of the complainant from 04-04-2002 to 19-02-2010 to which the complainant agreed as well. We think though there is no expressed provision in the Kerala Water Supply and Sewage Act 1986. The terms agreed by the parties are in tune with natural justice.

5. Accordingly, we close the proceedings partly allowing the complaint with the following directions :

1. The 3^rd opposite party shall issue a fresh bill to the complainant on the basis of the long average consumption of the potable water by the complainant from 04-04-2002 to 19-02-2010.

2. The 3^rd opposite party shall adjust the remittances made by the complainant.

The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30^th day of June 2011.