DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 25th day of July 2016
Present : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President
: Smt.Suma.K.P. Member
: Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member Date of filing: 24/07/2015
(C.C.No.105/2015)
Jayaraj.A.D. - Complainant
S/o.Appunni,
Dwaraka House Arampadam,
Thathamangalam Post – 678 102
Chittur, Palakkad
(By Adv.M.J.Vince)
Vs
Sadhanandhan
Officer in Charge,
Assistant Engineer,
Quality Control Lab,
Kerala Water Authority,
Kalmandapam, Palakkad - Opposite party
(By Adv. K.A.Stanly James)
O R D E R
By Shri. V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
Brief facts of case.
The complainant resides in Thathamangalam, Palakkad in a house of his own. He used to collect water from the well in his compound for drinking and cooking purposes. He was doing this for the last 20 plus years. According to the complainant, there was no damage, or other irregularities regarding the water till January 2015. But since 2015 January the complainant found a green colour in the water and in order to verify whether the water was fit for drinking and to clear off the green colour in the well, he contacted the office of opposite party. When he reached the office of opposite party the Asst.Engineer told him that there was remedy for the defects of water and to remedied the defect, the water should be tested. According to the Asst.Engineer, the water in Chittur area has high fluride content and it is better to test the water and after the results he will explained the measures to be taken so that the water will be clean. He also assured the complainant that he would personally monitor the same. Believing the words of the Asst.Engineer, the complainant paid the stipulated amount of Rs.500/- for testing the water on 20/04/2015, the receipt therefore dated 20/4/2015 was issued by Kerala Water Authority for physical and chemical water analysis. The receipt issued by Kerala Water authority was marked as Ext.A1. According to the complainant the samples of water were asked to be taken to the office by him and the samples were collected by an unqualified person. He was asked to pay Rs.500/- and a receipt was issued for the same. Believing the words of the opposite party the complainant waited for the results, but when the result came he was surprised to see that all the parameters of the tested sample water were stated as within desirable limit. Report on analysis of water given to the complainant by Kerala Water Authority Quality Control District lab was marked as Ext.A5. When asked about this to the person who gave the result he stated that this was the only test conducted here and if the complainant had any more grievance he could contact the Asst.Engineer. On contacting the Asst.Engineer, he explained that the water was fit for drinking. The complainant told the Asst.Engineer, that he was using the same water for many years and know that it is not harmful. The complainant contacted him further for the green colour of the water and he stated that all the tested parameters were within desirable limit. While the complainant was talking to the Asst.Engineer another person who was last grade lascar Govt.Servant asked the complainant to put bleaching powder into the well for clearing the green colour of the water. The Asst.Engineer, present there also stated that this was the only remedy. He returned home and applied bleaching powder to the well as per the directions given by the water authority officials. Nothing was seen for two days, but after two days a foul smell started and the complainant immediately contacted the water authority office but they were unable to explain the cause of the colour and smell. They also asked the complainant to further test the water. But he was reluctant to do the test again and when he asked the Asst.Engineer about the same the person who earlier advised him to put bleaching powder asked him to get out of his office and threatened him that otherwise they would be forced to file a police complaint against the complainant in the presence of Asst.Engineer and Chemist. Aggrieved by this the complainant filed a complaint to the Police Authorities. But since this was a case of deficiency of service, the police authorities asked the complainant to file a complaint to the Forum. Hence this complaint. The complainant further pleads that opposite party had asked the complainant to test the water to know the reasons for the change of its colour and he was asked to pay Rs.500/- for the same. Believing the words of opposite party and making him assured of curing the defect of water the opposite party deliberately took an evasive step by stating that the water was within desirable limit and fit for drinking. This amounts to deficiency of service on the part of opposite party, according to the complainant. The complainant had agreed to testing of the water after making him believe that the opposite party would recommend certain measures to know the reasons for the colour and control of the colour. Even after paying the amount prescribed and test being conducted, the opposite party was unable to detect the defect of water and they also suggested crude methods of destroying the water and contaminating the same which is done by a person who is in charge of the entire water supply in Palakkad town. This amounts to clear deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party, according to the complainant.
According to the complainant the cause of action for the complaint arose on 20/04/2015 when he gave samples of water from his well to the opposite party for testing and on 17/6/2015, when a complaint was filed to the police and on 26/6/15 when he caused to issue notice to opposite party and thereafter at Palakkad where the opposite party’s office being situated within the jurisdiction of the Forum.
The complainant prays to the Forum to pass an order directing the opposite party to pay Rs.500/- being the amount paid by the complainant for the test as advised by the opposite party, to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant and to pay the entire cost of this proceedings and directing the opposite party to grant such other relief which the Forum considers as fit.
The complaint was admitted and notice was issued to opposite party. In their version and affidavit submitted by opposite party the opposite party contended that the petitioner came to their office on 20/4/2015. He also brought water and asked opposite party to do physical and chemical test. He also paid Rs.500/- for this purpose vide receipt No.411044 issued by Kerala Water Authority office to the complainant. The test result was handed over to the complainant on 7/5/2015 by opposite party’s office vide Ext.A5. According to opposite party, when the complainant came to their office with 2 Litre water for testing the following matters were explained to him. 1) In opposite party’s office there are facilities for conducting physical, chemical and bacteriological tests. 2) for conducting these three tests fees of Rs.850/- should be remitted in this office. 3) for conducting these three tests the complainant has to bring water in the sterilized bottle given by opposite party’s office.
According to opposite party, complainant informed them that it was sufficient that the water brought by the complainant should be tested, without conducting bacteriological test. After receiving fees for that test, the test result was given to the complainant, according to opposite party. The complainant did not inform opposite party about the water or colour of the water, i.e., whether he brought the water from his house or the water he was using, whether there was any colour difference in the water brought by him, were not intimated to Water authority officials. If he had informed these to opposite party the opposite party would have sent his staff to collect samples of water. The opposite party conducted all these tests demanded by the complainant and only after that gave the results to the latter. The opposite party collected only the amount prescribed for conducting the test demanded by the complainant. The opposite party did not fail to test water and in testing water they did not commit any deficiency. The opposite party did not tell the complainant that the water brought by him was fit for drinking. Opposite party or opposite party’s staff did not instruct the complainant to put bleaching powder into his well. On the part of opposite party no dereliction of duties and no deficiency of service occurred. Opposite party did only test the water brought by the complainant and handed over its results to the complainant. This was done by opposite party without any deficiency on their side.
Opposite party also contends that they are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant. They are also not liable to refund fees of Rs.500/- remitted by the complainant to this office for testing water brought by the latter. Also opposite party are not liable to pay Rs.50,000/- compensation claimed by the complainant.
Hence the opposite party prays to the Forum to allow their contention and dismiss the complaint with costs.
The complainant filed chief affidavit, argument notes and IA 402/15 seeking permission to cross examine opposite party. No objection was raised to that and hence allowed. Ext.A1 to A5 were marked from the side of the complainant. Opposite party filed chief affidavit and was cross examined as DW1. Opposite party also filed notes of argument. Complainant filed IA 199/16 to reopen evidence with documents. No counter in IA allowed. Hence IA allowed. Original of Ext.A1 produced. Quality Control Lab report was also produced and marked as Ext.A5. Notes of argument were also filed by the counsel of the complainant.
From the above it is clear that the following are the issues in this case.
- Whether is there is any negligence and deficiency of service from the part of opposite party ?
- If so, what is the relief ?
Issues 1 & 2
According to the complainant he lives in a house with a compound of his own and he is using water drawn from the well situated in his compound, neatly maintained. He was doing the same for the last 20 odd years. One day he noticed some sought of greenish colour in the water and was seen increasing. In order to verify whether the water was fit for drinking and clear off the green colour in the well he went to the office of Kerala Water Authority, Kalmandapam Palakkad. He explained to opposite party the matter and the then present staff advised him to get the water tested; otherwise it might caused damages to the complainant by consuming the said water. The Asst.Engineer, also told him that there is remedy for all the defects of water and the same can be done only after testing the water. He also stated that the water in Chittur area is having high fluoride content and it is better to test the water first and after the result he will explain the measures to be taken and if treated so the water will be clean. He also assured him that he would personally monitor the same. Believing the words of opposite party he paid Rs.500/- which is the stipulated fee for the test of water, on 20/4/2015 and got a receipt for the same from the Kerala Water Authority Office, marked as Ext.A1. But according to the complainant the samples of water asked to be taken to the Kerala Water Authority office by him, were collected by an unqualified person. Believing the words of opposite party the complainant waited for the result; but when the result came he was surprised to see that all the parameters of tested sample water were stated in the report to be within desirable limit. The report on analysis of water issued by quality control District lab of Kerala Water Authority was marked as Ext.A5. When asked about this to the person who gave the result he stated that this was the only test conducted here and if the complainant has any more grievance he can contact the Asst.Engineer. The complainant then contacted the Asst.Engineer, who explained to him that the water is fit for drinking on explaining to him that he contacted him for the green colour in the Water, the latter stated that all the tested parameters were within desirable limits. The Asst.Engineer also stated that putting some bleaching powder into the well for clearing the green colour of the water was the only remedy. Then, after returning home the complainant applied bleaching powder to the well as per the directions of Kerala Water authority officials. According to him nothing was seen for two days but after that a foul smell started and he again contacted Kerala Water Authority office. Kerala Water Authority office people were unable to explain the cause of the colour and smell. They asked the complainant to test the water again but he was unwilling to do the test again. When the complainant asked the Asst.Engineer about this a last grade lascar Govt.Servant asked the complainant to get out of the office and threatened him that they would be forced to file a police complaint against the complainant in the presence of Asst.Engineer and Chemist. A registered notice with acknowledgement due marked as Ext.A3 and A4 were also sent to the opposite party for getting compensation. Aggrieved by the action of the opposite party the complainant gave a complaint to the police authorities. The police authorities suggested to him that this was a case of deficiency of service and therefore complaint should be given to the Forum. Hence this complaint.
During his cross examination of opposite party as DW1 the Asst.Engineer of Quality Control District Laboratory, Kerala Water Authority, Kalmandapam, Palakkad admit that he is a diploma holder in Civil engineering and deposed to the Forum that the process of testing water was known only to the Chemist and he did not know that process. He also admitted that he did not know bacteriological water testing process. He also deposed that he did not know what all tests demanded to be conducted by the complainant. When being reexamined after being crossed he also deposed to the Forum that as per the receipt given, physical and chemical tests only were demanded, fees only for those tests were given and report of these tests only was given.
In their affidavit opposite party contended that the complainant came to his office on 20/4/2015 and asked this laboratory to conduct physical and chemical tests of the water brought by him, remitted Rs.500/- to this office, receipt No.411044 for Rs.500/- was given by this office and the result of the test was given to the complainant on 7/5/2015 (vide Exts.A1 & A5).
According to opposite party when the complainant came to his office for testing 2 litres of water brought by him, three things were explained to him that 1) In opposite party’s office there are facilities for conducting physical, chemical and bacteriological tests. 2) for conducting these three tests fees of Rs.850/- should be remitted in this office. 3) for conducting these three tests the complainant has to bring water in the sterilized bottle given by opposite party’s office.
Further on the demand of the complainant, without conducting bacteriological test, test result was given. He did not inform the KWA staff that which water was brought by him ( whether his well water or his using water), in the water brought by him presence of change in colour. If he had informed the Kerala Water Authority office about the above the Kerala Water authority office would have sent their workers and collected the sample water. All the tests demanded by the complainant were conducted by opposite party and their results were given to him.
On the basis of the above, we observed that the complainant is an ignorant customer coming from a rural area. He does not know what all tests are necessary for knowing whether the water is potable or not. He remitted Rs.500/- for testing water brought by him. (vide Ext.A1). It is not understood that whether the Asst.Engineer has given clear and convincing information that only by conducting bacteriological test also the correct test result can be obtained. Further that it is the chemist who should give necessary information regarding correct testing of water and the water testing results because he is in the better know of things. Hence we observe that the tests conducted by KWA staff were neither by qualified chemist nor under his close supervision.
If necessary and sufficient information was given to the complainant and all the tests were conducted by qualified KWA staff the complainant could have got correct result and he could have satisfied himself regarding whether his well water is potable or not. Further opposite party did not give serious attention to the green colour of well water of the complainant. Opposite party did not suggest a correct solution to remove the green colour of the well water of the complainant which the complainant has been stated to be using for the last 20 odd years. Hence, we find that opposite party is negligent and committed grave deficiency of service. Therefore we allow the complaint.
We order the opposite party to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) for negligence and deficiency of service, Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) for mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs.500/- (Rupees Five hundred only) towards litigation expenses.
Order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which complainant is eligible for 9% interest per annum for the whole amount from the date of the receipt of this order, till realization.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 25th day of July 2016.
Sd/-
Shiny.P.R.
President
Sd/-
Suma.K.P.
Member
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 – Payment receipt for testing water issued by opposite party dated
20/4/15
Ext.A2 - Copy of acknowledgement receipt of petition of police complaint
dated 17/6/15 issued by Palakkad Town North Police Station
Ext.A3 - Copy of lawyer notice dated 22/6/15 issued by complainant to
opposite party
Ext.A4 –Acknowledgement card
Ext.A5 – Quality Control District lab report dated 20/4/2015 issued by opposite
party.
Exhibits marked on the side of opposite parties
Nil
Complainant cross examined
Nil
Opposite party cross examined
DW1 – Sadanandhan, Asst.Engineer
Cost
Rs.500/- allowed as cost of the proceedings.
