BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

O.P. No. 198/2002 Filed on 13.05.2002

Dated : 15.06.2009

Complainant:

S. Sasidharan, Vasantha Bhavan, Chenchery, Nalanchira P.O, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. S.V. Shaji)

Opposite parties:

1. The Mananging Director, Kerala Water Authority, Thiruvananthapuram.

    

2. Assistant Executive Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, Kowdiar Sub Division, Thiruvananthapuram.

This complaint is disposed of after the period so specified under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Though the case was taken up for orders by the predecessors of this Forum on 12.12.2003, the order was not prepared accordingly. This Forum assumed office on 08.02.2008. This O.P having been taken as heard on 15.05.2009, the Forum on 15.06.2009 delivered the following:

ORDER

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD: PRESIDENT

The facts leading to the filing of the complaint are that complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties vide consumer No. UPW/2503, that the connection was under domestic category and that on 20.02.2002 complainant received a cut off notice from opposite parties and that complainant was directed to pay Rs. 8,953/- towards water charges upto 01/02 as per the provisional invoice card. On receiving the cut off notice from the opposite parties complainant approached the opposite parties and on enquiry it was informed that the said consumer No. was included in non-domestic category from 15.01.1998 and thereby higher charge was levied. Complainant had not used water for non-domestic purpose and inclusion of the said consumer No. under non-domestic category was not in the knowledge of the consumer since the opposite parties had not informed the consumer about the conversion of tariff by way of notice. Hence this complaint to include the said consumer No. under domestic category from 1998 onwards and to quash the cut off notice issued by opposite parties.

Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version contending that complainant is a regular defaulter of water charge remittance, that the complainant had not made any remittance after 15.01.1998, that upto 01/98 he has remitted only Rs. 1000/-. The arrear amount along with charges for 02/98 to 1/02 had increased to Rs. 8,953/- and hence cut off notice was issued on 02/02. The consumer was supposed to remit monthly charge as per provisional invoice card, the consumer failed to remit continuously for more than 4 years. The period of exact arrear could not be specified in the notice as the arrear was inclusive of part of the charges for 01/86 to 01/98. By 2/98 it was reported that construction work was going on using pipe water at this site. On verification it was seen that modification/reconstruction of ground floor and construction of first floor was going on using pipe water. Hence from 2/98 onwards the connection was treated as non-domestic. The meter is not working from 1986 onwards. Hence reading could not be taken after that. Consumer was directed to replace the faulty meter, but he is purposefully avoiding it as he is very sure that average consumption will be more than 10 KL.

The points that arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant is liable to pay water charges under non-domestic category?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get quashed the notice dated 20.02.2002?

3. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

4. Other reliefs.

In support of the complaint, complainant has filed an affidavit in lieu of examination in chief and Exts. P1 to P4 were marked. In rebuttal, 2^nd opposite party has filed affidavit. Opposite parties did not furnish any documents.

Points (i) to (iv) :- Admittedly, the complainant is a consumer of opposite parties vide consumer No. UPW 2503. Submission by the complainant is that he is a consumer under domestic category and that on 20.02.2002 complainant received a cut off notice from opposite parties. Ext. P1 is the copy of the said notice dated 20.02.2002. As per Ext. P2, complainant has not paid Rs. 8953/- towards water charges upto 01/02 as per provisional invoice card within the time allowed. It is not clear from Ext. P1 notice that from which date onwards the water charge fell due. It is contended by the complainant that on enquiry of the opposite party's office it was informed that the said consumer number was included in non-domestic category from 15.01.1998 and thereby higher charge was levied. Submission by the complainant is that he has not used water for non-domestic purpose as alleged in the complaint and inclusion of the said consumer number in non-domestic category was not in the knowledge of the consumer, since the opposite party had not informed the consumer about the conversion of tariff by way of notice. Ext. P2 is the copy of the letter addressed to the 1^st opposite party. Ext. P4 is the copy of the receipt dated 21.05.2002 for Rs. 2000/- issued by the opposite party. Ext. P3 is the consumer's meter card. As per Ext. P3, the date of connection is 20.03.1985. On 4/85 meter reading was 12 KL, on 10/85 meter reading was 62 KL, on 12.11.1989 meter reading was 579 KL, which rose to 683 KL on 16.01.1993. Thereafter from 01/98 onwards meter was not working. According to opposite parties, the complainant is a regular defaulter of water charge remittance, and he had remitted only Rs. 1000/- upto 01/98. Thereafter the arrear amount upto 01/02 comes to Rs. 8953/-. Complainant did not furnish any document or receipt other than Ext. P4 to show whether he has remitted any amount towards water charge prior to 21.05.2002. The amount of Rs. 2,000/- as per Ext. P4 is seen remitted by the consumer as per direction of this Forum as a part of the bill amount. Complainant did not produce the provisional invoice card to show the category of water connection. There is specific provision in the Water Supply Regulations if the consumer fails to remit water charges within the prescribed time of the provisional invoice card. Neither the complainant nor the opposite parties did furnish provisional invoice card. As per Ext. P3 consumer's meter card, water meter remained faulty from 09/98. If meter remains faulty, it has to be replaced by the consumer with the consent of the opposite parties. No steps is seen taken by the consumer to replace the water meter or any step is seen taken by the opposite parties to insist the consumer to replace the faulty meter with a new one. Ext. P1 notice is seen sent by oppoiste parties during the period when meter remained faulty. It is further submitted by opposite parties that by 2/98 it was reported that construction work was going on (using pipe water) at complainant's building and that on verification it was seen modification/reconstruction of ground floor and construction of first floor was going on using pipe water and hence from 2/98 onwards the connection was treated as non-domestic. It is submitted by the complainant that there is a well in his place, that water supply is not regularly available in his area, that even meter reading was not taken at regular interval, that he has not used water for non-domestic purpose and that the conversion of connection from domestic to non-domestic was without any notice to the complainant. Complainant has not been cross examined by the opposite parties. Further the onus of proving the use of water for non-domestic purpose will rest on the party who raises such allegation. Herein opposite parties did not adduce any evidence to substantiate the contention in the version that complainant has used pipe water for non-domestic purposes and thereby, connection category status was converted to non-domestic . Further such conversion is seen done by the opposite parties without issuing any notice and without hearing the complainant. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that such conversion of tariff from domestic to non-domestic is arbitrary and against facts and hence complainant is bound to pay water charge under the tariff of domestic category and that Ext.P1 cut off notice deserves to be quashed. From Ext. P4 it is evident that complainant has remitted Rs. 2,000/- as part payment. Since water meter remains faulty, it has to be replaced at complainant's own cost. After installation of the new water meter, on the basis of average meter reading for three months, opposite parties shall raise fresh bill under domestic tariff after adjusting Rs. 2000/- already remitted by the complainant as per Ext. P4 dated 21.05.2002 and other amount if any remitted thereafter by the complainant towards water charges.

In the result, complaint is allowed. Ext. P1 cut off notice dated 20.02.2002 issued by the opposite parties is hereby cancelled. Complainant shall replace the old faulty meter with a new meter and opposite party shall permit the complainant to replace the same. After the installation of new meter opposite parties shall raise a fresh bill under domestic category to the consumer, on the basis of average meter reading for three months for the whole period retrospectively from 2/98 onwards after adjusting Rs. 2000/- remitted by the consumer on 21.05.2002 and other amounts if any remitted thereafter. There will be no compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. Both parties shall bear and suffer their costs.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 15^th day of June 2009.

G. SIVAPRASAD,

President.

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

O.P. No. 198/2002

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

NIL

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Copy of notice (original) No. 44 dated 20.02.2002.

P2 - Copy of letter dated 23.04.2002 issued to opposite party by the complainant.

P3 - Consumer's meter card of meter No. 13499 issued by opposite party.

P4 - Copy of receipt dated 21.05.2002 for Rs. 2000/-.

III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :

NIL

IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :

NIL

PRESIDENT