DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 21st day of November 2018
Present : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President
: Smt.Suma.K.P. Member Date of filing: 23/11/201720/04/2017
: Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
CC/170/2017
K.Damodharan,
S/o Late Raman Ezhuthachan,
Melekalam House, Pattola,
Manappadam Post, Palakkad. - Complainant
(By Party in person only)
Vs
1. The Assistant Engineer,
Kerala Water Authority,
PH Section, Alathur, 678 541.
2. The Assistant Executive Engineer,
PH Sub Division,
Kerala Water Authority, Alathur, - Opposite parties
678 541.
(Opp.party 1 & 2 Adv.Stanly James & Pramod.P.K)
O R D E R
By Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
Brief facts of the case are described below.
The case of the complainant is explained below.
Complainant has taken a water connection from the opposite parties on 09.03.2011 as per consumer number - 1616/D category and had been paying water charges every year promptly upto 03.02.2014 and obtaining receipt for the payment of water charge. The complainant’s meter reading was inspected on 01.11.2014 on which date his meter reading was shown as 1289 kilo litres. For the 35 months period as per average bill for each kl of water supply @ Rs.250/-, a bill was given to the complainant for Rs.8,750/- (Rupees 250 x 35 months) after deducting the amount so far paid by him of Rs.2,345/-, the balance amount was Rs.6,405/- (Rs.8,750/- - Rs.2,345/-). According to the complainant the loss occurred during this period was due to meter reading not being taken properly and regularly and this loss was not liable to be suffered by the complainant. He also pleads that water charge unfairly levied on him may be avoided, showing which on 17.10.2017 a letter was sent to the 2nd opposite party and in the reply it was stated that during the said period (09.03.2011 to 12.02.2014) in the jurisdiction of this office there was a shortage of meter readers. But complainant pleads that this is not correct because, in all nearby houses during this period meter reading was correctly taken, also in a four member family, complainant’s house does not require this much water. Complainant also pleads that the reason for this unscientific meter reading is that in each month’s consumption of allowable fifteen kl water consumption is measured by him and liability for that is also levied on the complainant; and also monthly rent is Rs.67/-, average amount for 25 months during which meter reading was also taken and recorded as Rs.8,750/- (Rupees 250 x 35). As per the explanation given by the 1st opposite party dated 17.10.2017 to the complainant, for each kl water Rs.222/- was levied i.e Rs.222 x 35 i.e Rs.7,770/-,but as per bill number 216 dated 01/11/2014 according to which 250 x 35 is = Rs.8,750/- (01.11.2014 : Rs.8,750 – Rs.7,770 = Rs.980/-) which according to the complainant, shows opposite party’s irresponsibility and deficiency in their service. On 01.11.2014 after receiving bill number 216 during the six months period 3 times the concerned officials of Kerala Water Authority, Alathur were contacted but they did not directly inspect the anomaly in the meter reading and did not exempt the complainant from the excess liability and no steps were taken there on. Regarding meter reading with anomaly the complainant verbally requested 3 times which was neglected and a bill number 2983 for Rs.12,065/- was issued to him. On 17.09.2015 complainant went to Kerala Water Authority office and complaint was given verbally. The opposite parties asked the complainant to pay Rs.2,000/- immediately or else legal steps will be taken against him. Accordingly complainant paid Rs.2,000/- as per AX No-1586568 and obtained the receipt. According to the complainant he was also asked to pay the balance amount in instalments at the earliest and the complainant paid Rs.2,000/- only towards instalment due. But without getting complainant’s written consent letter, the instalment method was thrust on him which according to the complainant amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. In 2016 January an application to disconnect his water connection was given by the complainant to the Kerala Water Authority but complainant’s water connection was disconnected only in June 2017 and as per the final bill number 30783724, the amount was Rs.10,971/- from 09.03.2011 to 03.08.2014. Total amount due from the complainant was Rs.5,102/-only. This amount was paid by the complainant to the Kerala Water Authority. As per the report given by the Assistant Executive Engineer of Kerala Water Authority, gross amount payable on 17.10.2017 was Rs.16,619/-, amount paid Rs.5,102/- and the balance amount was Rs.11,517/-. But on 16.11.2017 as per bill number 30783724, balance amount was Rs.10,971/-. According to the complainant he cannot understand the reason for this difference. According to the complainant financial loss has occurred to him, due to mental agony, which is also not caused by him, and his son has also lost ten working days for helping the complainant. Hence, complainant prays to this Hon’ble Forum, 1) due to deficiency in service Rs.10,971/- being the balance amount due to meter reading may be of financial liability exempted from the concerned responsible official. 2) to recover Rs.10,000/- towards the cost incurred by the complainant and his son due to non working of 10 working days, from the concerned officials. 3) Rs.15,000/- towards cost of proceedings incurred and Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony suffered may be paid to the complainant. Therefore complainant prays to this Hon’ble Forum for a total compensation of Rs.35,000/-.
Complaint was admitted and notices were sent to opposite parties to enter appearance and file versions.
In the version jointly filed by the 1st & 2nd opposite parties, they contend that except those admitted, they deny the statements mentioned in the complaint. According to the opposite parties before filing appeal against the complainant, Revenue Recovery steps were started and the said complaint cannot be settled by this Forum who has no authority and therefore complaint may be dismissed. Opposite parties also admit that complainant is a consumer of 1616/D water connection from 09.03.2011 but denies the statements as false that the meter reading of this connection was taken on 01.11.2014 for 35 months as per average bill for a kl @ 250/- amount of Rs.8,750/- was charged. According to the opposite parties bill was calculated as 37 kls per month but @ Rs.222/- calculation should be made but Rs.250/- was shown by clerical mistake; during that period the Government increased water charge and afterwards due to public agitation, it was reduced; because of this due to misunderstanding it happened. Opposite parties also contend that complainant’s statements that for loss due to non taking of meter reading, he is not liable and not taking meter reading is an encroachment of the consumers right to know about his water consumption quantity every month used by him is not correct. Complainant has no right to state that he cannot remit the bill due to non giving of bill to him as per the contract entered into between the complainant and the Kerala Water Authority which is also signed by him. As per water supply regulations consumer is liable to protect the water meter and the consumer can know the meter reading by seeing the meter. During 2011 to 2014 in Alathur Sub Division of Kerala Water Authority, there was shortage of meter readers. The complainant’s statement that because of unscientific meter reading fifteen kls water usage allowable to the complainant was lost and its liability was also thrust on him is untrue, which is also denied by these opposite parties. Fifteen kilo litters is a provisionally given bill, with increase in water consumption additional bill is given and in the slab also change happens which can be done lawfully as per water supply regulation and the contract with the consumer. On 02.06.2015 complainant was given a bill for Rs.12,065/- as demanded by the complainant, on 17.09.2015, the above amount was allowed to be remitted in instalments and the complainant remitted the 1st instalment of Rs.2.000/- that day itself. The statement of the complainant that facility of payment in instalments as per the demand of the complainant was thrust on him is false and made wrongly for the purpose of this complaint. It was on 17.09.2015 water bill was paid lost. After receiving the bill on 01.11.2014, meter reading anomalies should be inspected directly, excess liability on the complainant may be exempted, demanding which three times within six months complainant contacted Kerala Water Authority, Alathur officials and complainant was sent back saying that they will inspect – all these statements are falsely made for the purpose of this complaint and hence denied by these opposite parties. It is correct that to the complainant a bill for Rs.10,971/- was given, also upto this date complainant paid Rs.5,102/- is also correct. The last meter reading of the complainant was on 30.05.2017 and it was 1989 kls after that on 14.08.2017 the above connection was disconnected. Till this date complainant used water. Therefore after deducting Rs.5,102/- paid by the complainant. Complainant is liable to pay the bill amount of Rs.10,971/-. These opposite parties also contend that there is no deficiency happened on their part and therefore complainant has not suffered any mental agony or mental tension. Also to the complainant, these opposite parties did not cause any financial loss. In order to avoid remitting the above amount by misunderstanding this Forum false reasons are pleaded by the complainant. As per the complaint complainant has no right to get any relief and to get compensation, cost of litigation. Amount demanded by the complainant is also very large. Therefore these opposite parties pray to this Hon’ble Forum to accept their contentions and complaint may be dismissed with cost to these opposite parties.
Complainant and the opposite parties filed their affidavits. They also filed additional affidavits. From the side of the complainant Exts.A1 to A10 were marked and from the side of the opposite parties Exts.B1 to B3 were marked.
The following issues crop up in this case.
- Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties ?
- If so, the relief and cost which the complainant is entitled for?
Issues 1 & 2
Complainant availed a domestic water connection from the opposite parties on 09/03/2011 with water connection number-1661/D and was paying every year water charges thereon promptly upto 03/02/2014 which is proved by exhibit A7 series. This complaint is filed by the complainant regarding unfairly levying of water charges on him by the opposite parties in respect of the above said domestic water connection. The exhibit A1 shows that complainant’s meter reading was taken on 01/01/2014 and 1289 kl of water was consumed by the complainant during the period of billing from 03/11 to 1/14 for a period of 35 months and the net amount payable was Rs.4,405/-. According to the complainant for 35 months’ period as per average bill for each kl of water Rs.250/- was charged, the bill amount was Rs.8,750/-(Rs.250 x 35) and after deducting the already paid amount of Rs. 2,345/- the net amount was arrived at Rs.6,405/-. The complainant submits that this amount was due to non taking of meter reading between 09/03/2011 and 01/11/2014 as a result of which complainant could not know quantity of water actually consumed for each month. For the purpose of getting exemption from payment of this unfairly levied water charge on 06/10/2014 a complaint was given to Assistant Executive Engineer which is proved by exhibit A5 to which a reply was given by the second opposite party which is marked as exhibit A3 series which shows opposite party’s explanation about meter readings and amounts paid by the complainant. Again on 02/06/2014 bill number 2983 was issued to the complainant which is marked as exhibit A2 which shows amount to be remitted by the complainant as Rs.12,065/-,present reading as 1930 kl, period of billing as 2/14 to 2/15, quantity of water consumed as 640 kl. Complainant also submits that on 17/09/2015 he reached KWA office and remitted Rs.2,000/- as per bill no 1586568 dated 17/09/2015 marked as exhibit A 7 series. Complainant also alleges deficiency in service because without getting his written permission instalment payment of water charges arrears was thrust upon him by the opposite parties who also collected the first instalment of Rs.2,000/- from him. The payment of Rs.2,000/- first instalment is evident from exhibit A7 series. Complainant also alleges that RR steps began on 23/10/2017 but submits that on 06/10/2017 complainant gave a request to the opposite parties to exempt him from payment of unfair water charges for Rs.10,411/-which letter to the second opposite party is marked as exhibit A5. The reply to this letter was received only on 30/10/2017 which is marked as exhibit A6. The opposite parties have not made any adjustments once in 6 months and changes in water tariff were not informed in writing to the complainant till he filed his complaint . As per RTI reply complainant can be charged RS. 222/- only for every kilo litre water usage, but he was charged at Rs.250/- regarding which no written information was received by the complainant till the date of filing the complaint. Regarding adjustment to be done by the opposite parties once in 6 months, the provisional invoice card issued to the complainant marked as exhibit A9 states that “the amount indicates for monthly payment is only provisional. The actual amount due will be ascertained on reading the meters and necessary adjustment bill showing amounts due to/from your bill will be sent to you once in 6 months“. This duty is not seen performed by the opposite parties which shows their service deficiency. Further as per meter reading call issued to the complainant marked as exhibit A10 it is seen that meter reading has been taken on 12/02/2014 firstly, then after 8 months on 20/10/2014 and then only on 22/02/2015. During the period of billing from 03/11 to 01/14 no reading was seen taken by the opposite parties between 09/03/2011 and 12/02/2014 which discloses that meter reading was not taken by the opposite parties promptly and regularly which sufficiently demonstrates commission of service deficiency on the part of opposite parties which has caused enough mental agony and stress to the complainant. Hence this complaint. To prove their contentions the opposite parties have filed three exhibits viz., exhibits B1 to B3. Exhibit B 1 is a photo copy of Agreement for supply of water signed by the second opposite party . Exhibit. B2 is a photocopy of the KWA water charge tariff issued by the second opposite party and exhibit. B3 is a photo copy of requisition for recovery of amount other than public revenue on land which is recoverable under the Act issued by the KWA Alathur PH Sub division.
We have perused the affidavits and the documents filed by both parties and understood that complainant has taken from the opposite parties a domestic water connection to his house on 09/03/2011, but meter readings were taken by the opposite parties only on 12/02/2014, then on 20/10/2014, and 20/02/2015 which is clear from the meter reading card issued to the complainant by the opposite parties marked as Ext.A10. It is also seen that the opposite parties did not try to fix the average consumption of the water by the complainant on his water connection by taking meter readings continuously for 6 months as envisaged under the rules; without doing so we observe that the opposite parties have no right to demand huge amounts of Rs.8,750/- and Rs.10,411/- from the complainant towards arrears of water charges. We also view that it is the duty of the opposite parties to take meter readings periodically and intimate the complainant about the quantity of consumption of water and revision of the minimum charges. We further view that non availability of meter readers stated by the opposite parties is not a ground for the opposite parties to justify their act for not taking meter readings periodically. It is only natural that if a huge water bill comes to a senior citizen consumer like this complainant it will be shocking to the complainant and will definitely cause much mental distress to him considering the fact that he has been paying water charges at minimum tariff rate every year without any default which is proved by receipts for payment of water charges at minimum tariff rate, issued by the opposite parties, which receipts are marked as Ext.A7 series. We also observe that complainant has given a request dated 06/10/2017 as per Ext.A5 to the opposite parties for exempting him from payment of unfairly levied water charges of Rs.10,411/-. This request letter states that only after 3 years of complainant taking domestic water connection for his house, the opposite parties have taken meter reading only on 01.11.2014, although the complainant has remitted water charges at minimum tariff rate promptly for 3 years during which meter reading was not taken by the opposite parties which is clear from Ext.A7 series. There was a mistake in meter readings because complainant had not used the quantity of water mentioned as meter reading; mentioning all these a complaint was already given to the opposite parties to which no reply was given by the opposite parties to the complainant. As per Ext.A5 details of meter readings from 09.03.2011 to 23.08.2017 were also demanded from the opposite parties. Further RR action has been found to have been taken by the opposite parties against the complainant before these opposite parties send a reply to the complaint dated. 06/10/2017 of the complainant which is clear from Ext.B3 dated.23.10.2017. It is observed that the reply to the complaint letter of the complainant dated.06.10.17 was sent by the opposite parties only on 30/10/2017, before the receipt of the reply to his complaint letter by the complainant the opposite parties have initiated RR action against the complainant on 23.10.17. This act on the part of opposite parties shows unfair trade practice having been committed by the opposite parties against the complainant.
After considering all the above facts we conclude that service deficiency and unfair trade practice have been found committed by the opposite parties which has caused much mental agony and huge mental distress to the complainant and his family.
Therefore we decide to allow the complaint in part.
We order the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay to the complainant Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) by way of compensation for mental agony caused to the complainant and his family; in addition we direct the opposite parties to pay jointly and severally Rs.1,000/- (Rupees thousand only) towards cost of this proceedings.
This order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order; otherwise complainant is also entitled to 9% interest p.a on the total amount due to him from the date of this order till realization.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 21st day of November 2018.
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 - Additional bill No.216 issued by Kerala Water Authority to the complainant
Ext.A2 - Additional bill No.2983 issued by Kerala Water Authority to the complainant
Ext.A3 (series)- Reply issued by 2nd opposite party to the complainant
as per Right to Information Act 2005
Ext.4 - Intimation from Puthucode Village Office
Ext.A5 - Petition dated.06.10.17 given by the complainant to the Assistant Executive
Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, Alathur
Ext.A6 - Letter issued by opposite party to the complainant dated.30.10.17
Ext.A7 series - Receipts (6 No’s) issued by opposite party to the complainant
Ext.A8 series - Demand & Disconnection notices (11 No’s) issued by opposite party to the
Complainant
Ext.A9 - Provisional invoice card issued by opposite party to the complainant
Ext.A10- Meter Reading card issued by opposite party to the complainant
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties
Ext.B1 - Agreement for supply of water between the Assistant Engineer PH Section, Kerala
Water Authority, Alathur & the complainant consumer
Ext.B2 - Kerala Water Authority Water charge Tariff issued by the 2nd opposite party
Ext.B3 - Original Requisition for recovery of amount other than public revenue due on land
Which is recoverable under the Act dated.23.10.2017 issued to the complainant
Asking him to pay Rs.11,036/- on account of water charge arrears
Witness examined on the side of complainant
Nil
Witness examined on the side of opposite parties
Nil
Cost
Rs.1,000/-
