IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Tuesday the 31st day of January, 2017
Filed on 04.03.2016
Present
1.Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2 Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member)
C.C.No.70/2016
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Smt. P.K. Sarada 1. The Assistant Engineer
Karechira Veedu Kerala Water Authority
Thirumalabhagom P.O. Section Thuravoor – 688 532
Thuravoor
Cherthala – 688 540 2. The Assistant Executive Engineer
Kerala Water Authority
Sub Division, Cherthala
3. Kerala Water Authority
Executive Engineer, P.H. Division
Alappuzha
(By Adv. Joseph Mathew – for
Opposite parties)
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The allegations contained in the complaint are as follows:-
The complainant belongs to scheduled cast community and she is living along with her younger son in a property surrounded with contaminated water. Her residence was old and dilapidated with tiled roofing and since she was offered housing facility from the Social Welfare Department she had demolished the old building and constructed a temporary shed nearly using the same building number as instructed by the Panchayath Secretary. While so she applied for getting water connection to her temporary shed, and two officers of the water authority inspected property and after inspection they did not raise any objection. Later the water authority give the complainant a letter stating that in the inspection, her residential building number not found them and refused to the temporary shed. Hence the complaint is filed.
2. The version of the opposite parties is as follows:-
The complainant has no permanent residence. Even though the complainant was asked to produce any document to prove the ownership, the complainant failed to produce it. The opposite party never demanded huge amount for the water connection. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
3. According to the complainant, she applied for the water connection to the temporary shed, but opposite party refused to give the connection. The opposite party filed version stating that since the complainant has no house, they cannot give connection for domestic purpose. During the trial stage, complainant submitted before the Forum that she had permanent house and it was demolished for the construction of the new house. She produced the ownership certificate issued by the Panchayath. Thereafter opposite party submitted that they are willing to give water connection for the non domestic purpose. The Forum appointed an Advocate Commissioner to ascertain whether there existing any pipe line of water near the house of the complainant and whether the complainant entitled to get water connection for domestic purpose. In the report, Advocate Commissioner opined that the complainant is living in a temporary shed near the basement made for the new house and a pipe line was placed near the house. After getting the report, the opposite party submitted before the Forum that they are willing to give water connection to the complainant under the domestic tariff if she undertakes to use it only for the domestic purpose. It is pertinent to see that Government implementing programmes for the development and well being of the community and if the opposite party is dragging the matter by stating untenable objections it is unfair. Opposite party is bound to give water connection to the complainant.
In the result, complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are directed to give water connection to the complainant under domestic tariff. They are also at liberty to disconnect the connection under domestic tariff if the complainant exceeds the use of water above 15000 lr. per month. The order shall be complied within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.500/- each to the complainant per day for the delay.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me and
pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of January, 2017.
Sd/- Smt.Elizabeth George (President) :
Sd/- Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member) :
Appendix:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
