BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 11/07/2010

Date of Order : 29/06/2011

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.

Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

C.C. No. 425/2010

Between

 

And

O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. The case of the complainant is as follows :

The complainant purchased a residential building from Dr. Sachu Hassan. The water connection of the building was in the name of the previous owner Mr. Mani. M.R. The complainant is the beneficiary of the water connection. While so, an arrear bill for Rs. 71,146/- dated 29-05-2010 was issued to the complainant stating the arrears from 09-08-2007. The PIC amount is shown as Rs. 844/-. There was no consumption of water for several years and the meter was removed from the premises in the year 2007. The complainant is only liable to pay the PIC charges. Thus, the complainant is entitled to get the impugned bill set aside and to restore the water connection.

2. Version of the opposite parties :

An arrear bill was issued to the real consumer Mani. M.R. On receipt of the notice, he submitted a representation before the opposite party dated 23-05-2009 stating that the property was sold by him to Mr. M.A. Sreedharan, S/o. Ayyappan, Murithottathil in 1988. The water charges upto October 2007 was remitted. The water connection was disconnected on 31-10-2009 due to non-payment of water charges. It is true that the water meter was not working since 2007. The complainant has never approached the opposite party for any of his grievances or transfer of ownership of the water connection. The complainant is not entitled to get any of the reliefs mentioned in the complaint.

3. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant and Ext. A1 was marked on his side. The opposite party was examined as DW1. Exts. B1 to B6 were marked on their side. Heard the counsel for parties.

4. The points that came up for consideration are :-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get set aside the impugned bill?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the water connection restored?

5. Point Nos. i. and ii. :- Admittedly, the water connection in question stands in favour of one Mr. Mani. M.R. Ext. B2 goes to show that the said Mani filee an application before the 2^nd opposite party stating that he has already alienated the property to which the connection was granted with effect from 1988. According to the complainant, he is the present owner of the building. Ext. B1 goes to show that the meter reading is available from 13-05-2003 to 05-11-2007. Thereafter, there was no payment of water charges and the opposite party disconnected the water connection on 31-10-2009. During the course of the proceedings, the complainant has agreed to pay the water charge arrears taking the long average consumption from 14-02-2005 to 05-11-2007 on the basis of the water consumption mentioned in Ext. B1 consumer ledger. We think that the above assurance of the complainant is reasonable,and the opposite parties consent to which compounds the matter squarely. The parties are at liberty to proceed with accordingly. The complainant is duty bound to get the water connection transferred in his name forthwith. Since, he is the present owner of the property at his own cost.

6. In view of the above, we pass the following order:

1. The 2^nd opposite party shall issue a fresh bill taking the long average consumption of the complainant from 14-02-2005 to 05-11-2007 for the disputed period as mutually agreed upon by the parties.

2. The 2^nd opposite party shall restore the water connection of the complainant if he remits the above amount as per the direction.

3. The complainant shall take immediate steps to get the water connection transferred in his favour if so advised, failure of which would entitle the 2^nd opposite party to further legal recourse.

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 29^th day of June 2011.