BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 26/05/2012
Date of Order : 29/09/2012
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
C.C. No. 317/2012
Between
Jojo Thomas, | :: | Complainant |
Jo Bhavan, Karappallil (H), Pallimattom, Eroor. P.O., Rep. by his father and authorised agent K.G. Thomas, Karappallil (H), Jo Bhavan, Valanjavattom. P.O., Thiruvalla – 689 104. |
| (By Adv. Tom Joseph, Court Road, Muvattupuzha – 686 661) |
And
1. Managing Director, Kerala Water Authority, | :: | Opposite Parties |
Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The Assistant Executive Engineer, P.H. Sub – Division, Eroor South P.O., Thripunithura – 682 306. |
| (By Adv. P.A. Augustine, Standing Counsel for Kerala Water Authority, 91, D.D. Tex World, Market Road, Kochi - 11) |
O R D E R
A. Rajesh, President.
1. The case of the complainant is as follows :-
The complainant is the present owner of the house having water connection bearing consumer No. TPR/7793/D. He had been remitting monthly charges on the basis of the PIC amount of Rs. 181/-. Due to his job commitments, he shifted the residence from December 2010 onwards. While so, the complainant approached the 2nd opposite party on 20-10-2011 for clearing the water charge arrears, it was told that he has to remit Rs. 14,447/- towards the arrears for 10 months. Since the house has been vacant from December 2010 onwards, there was only negligible consumption of water. The complainant brought the above said aspect before the 2nd opposite party. He offered to refund the excess amount, if any after taking fresh meter reading. Believing the said assurance, the complainant paid Rs. 14,447/- on 20-10-2011. Immediately after remitting the charges demanded by the 2nd opposite party, the complainant approached the meter reader for taking meter reading. After taking the meter reading, he came to know that the consumption from 12-01-2011 to 20-10-2011 was only 220 units. Thereafter in spite of repeated requests, the opposite parties neither issued any fresh bill nor was the amount excessively collected refunded. Since the meter is not faulty, the opposite party is liable to issue bill on the basis of the actual consumption. The act of the opposite parties to collect huge amount without ascertaining the actual consumption amounts to deficiency in service. The complainant is entitled for the refund of Rs. 14,447/- after deducting the monthly charges from January 2012 onwards along with interest together with costs of the proceedings. The complaint hence.
2. The version of the opposite parties is as follows :-
The 2nd opposite party never offered to refund the excess amount, if any paid after taking fresh meter reading. However, adjustment of future bills to the excess amount paid is possible and this fact was informed to the complainant. The complainant remitted Rs. 14,447/- towards water charges upto October 2011. Based on the meter reading, the revised bill was issued on 06-03-2012 showing an excess payment of Rs. 10,087/- as on February 2012. As per the bill dated 22-06-2012, the excess amount received by the opposite party is Rs. 8,155/- as on May 2012. The balance in the excess amount paid can be adjusted towards future water charges.
3. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant. Exts. A1 to A3 were marked on his side. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the opposite parties. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. The only point that comes up for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of Rs. 14,447/- from the opposite parties together with costs of the proceedings?
5. Admittedly, the complainant remitted a sum of Rs. 14,447/- towards water charge arrears upto 20-10-2011 evident from Ext. A1. Thereafter, the complainant caused Ext. A2 letter dated 20-10-2011 to the 2nd opposite party requesting to verify the water meter and refund the excess amount remitted. The opposite parties in their version categorically stated that they are ready to adjust the excess amount collected from the complainant towards the future bills. The 2nd opposite party mentioned that the excess amount collected is Rs. 8,155/- as on May 2012.
6. We think that a direction to the opposite parties either to adjust the excess amount of Rs. 8,155/- with interest @ 12% p.a against the future water charge bills of the complainant or to refund the same with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of receipt till realisation. Ordered accordingly. It is made clear that the opposite parties are at liberty to choose either of the above directions to meet the ends of justice.
The order shall be complied with, in line with the above directions.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 29th day of September 2012.
Sd/- A. Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
A P P E N D I X
Complainant's Exhibits :-
Exhibit A1 | :: | Copy of the receipt dt. 20-10-2011 |
“ A2 | :: | Copy of the letter dt. 20-10-2011 |
“ A3 series | :: | Copy of consumer bills dt. 1611-2011 and 06-03-2012 |
Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil
=========
