BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 17/12/2010
Date of Order : 30/06/2011
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
C.C. No. 662/2010
Between
Neenamma Paily, | :: | Complainant |
Thekkethottiyil House, Kunnackal. P.O., Muvattupuzha, Rep. by her Power of Attorney Holder, T.C. Cherian, Thekkethottiyil House, Kunnackal. P.O., Muvattupuzha. |
| (By Adv. Tom Joseph, Court Road, Muvattupuzha, Pin – 686 661) |
And
1. Managing director, | :: | Opposite parties |
Kerala Water Authority, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, P.H. Sub-Division, Muvattupuzha. |
| (Op.pts 1 & 2 by Adv. Jeemon John, Opp. L.F Hospital, Angamaly) |
O R D E R
A. Rajesh, President.
1. The facts of the complainant's case are as follows :
The complainant availed herself of a non-domestic water supply connection from the 2nd opposite party. The complainant remitted Rs. 4,558/- on 25-10-2009 towards the water charges till September 2009. While so on 24-11-2010, the 2nd opposite party issued a bill to the complainant directing her to pay Rs. 10,247/- towards water charge arrears till October 2010. Though the complainant requested the 2nd opposite party to reconsider the bill, but there was no response. No additional bills were served on the complainant and the PIC was never refixed. So, the demand of the 2nd opposite party is unsustainable. The complainant is seeking direction against the opposite parties to withdraw the disputed bill and to pay costs of the proceedings.
2. version of the opposite party :
The disputed bill is for the water charge arrear from October 1999 to October 2009. The petition filed by the complainant was entrusted with the meter reader to take meter reading, but he reported that he could not do the same since the premises was fenced. The complainant is liable to pay the amount as per the bill.
3. No oral evidence was adduced by the parties. Exts. A1 and A2 and B1 to B3 were marked on the side of the complainant and the opposite parties respectively. Heard the counsel for the parties.
4. The only point that came up for consideration is whether the complainant is liable to pay the amount as per the impugned bill. Ext. B1 is the copy of the consumer ledger of the complainant's water connection. The meter reading from 10-04-2002 to 02-07-2010 is available in Ext. B1. Evidently, the meter reading gradually increased from 10-04-2002 to 13-01-2010, but there is a sudden spurt in the water consumption from 13-01-2010 to 02-07-2010. Before this Forum, both the parties agreed to calculate the consumption of water by taking the long average of the consumption from 10-04-2002 to 02-07-2010 though, there is no expressed provision in the Kerala Water Supply and Sewerage Act 1986. We feel that the matter can be settled since both the parties agree.
5. Accordingly, we set aside the bill in question and direct that, the opposite party shall issue a fresh bill for the disputed period after taking long average consumption from 10-04-2002 till date and adjust the remittances if any 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 30th day of June 2011.
