By. Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:-
The complaint filed against the opposite party to return the excess amount remitted towards the water charges or to adjust amount to the future bills along with cost and compensation.
2. The complaint in brief is as follows:- The complainant is a consumer of water supply No. KM/40/D. The meter fixed in the premise was faulty and later it was replaced on 15.05.2009. The complainant was a regular payee of water charges whereas the opposite party is not in the habit of taking meter reading and that is not entered in the card provided by the complainant. The complainant was issued a disconnection notice surprisingly in which it has demanded for the payment of Rs.2,093/-.
3. The complainant approached opposite party with an application to reduce the excess bill amount given to the complainant. The complainant was asked to approached the opposite party personally and when it found that the complainant was not ready to adjust with it and higher amount was demanded from the complainant and the complainant is under threat of disconnection. The complainant remitted Rs.2,000/- as an installment towards the bill amount. Even after payment of installment of Rs.2,000/- the opposite party demanded from the complainant Rs.6,398/-. Any how under the threat of the opposite party the complainant remitted Rs.5,051/-. In short opposite party received from the complainant Rs.7,051/- as the water charges. The demand of the opposite party for such a huge amount towards water consumption is a deficiency in service. There may be an Order directing the opposite party either to refund Rs.4,958/- with interest at the rate of 12% or adjust the amount to the water charges for the future bills along with cost and compensation.
4. The opposite party filed version in short it is as follows:- The consumer has been not a regular payee of water charges. Notice given to the complainant dated 14.10.2011 was for the arrear charges during the period 05/2009 to 09/2011 for a period of 29 months. The opposite party permitted the complainant to remit the amount in installment. There is no excess amount received from the consumer. The meter reader went to the house of the complainant for the purpose of recording the meter reading, the complainant informed the meter reader that the documents used for recording the meter reading is misplaced and meter reading can be recorded afterwards from the office. The complaint is not maintainable. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The complaint is to be dismissed with cost.
5. The Points that are to be decided:-
1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Relief and Cost.
6. Points No.1 and 2:- The evidence in this case consist of proof affidavit of the complainant. Ext.A1 to Ext.A8 are the documents of the complainant. Ext.B1 series is the document of opposite party.
7. The complainant's case is that the opposite party insisted the complainant to remit Rs.4,958/- as water charges. The excess amount remitted by the complainant to be either refunded or that amount to be adjusted for the future use of water. Ext.A1 is the disconnection notice demanded Rs.6,734/- as water charges. The complainant is a consumer of water authority having consumer No.6440. The period of monthly remittance as per the Ext.A3 Provisional Invoice card is 108.25/-.
8. The periodical remittance of water charges by the complainant is not entered in the provisional invoice card. Ext.A3 does not consist of remittance of the water charges. Ext.B1 series is the copy of personal ledger of the consumer. Apart from the personal ledger of this consumer nothing is produced by the opposite party to establish their contention that the opposite party did periodical inspection to take the meter reading. The opposite party is bound by the Regulations 1991 of the Kerala Water Authority to assess the increase or shortage of consumption of water periodically. The charges imposed by the opposite party is mto be basing on periodical inspection. If there is considerable hike in the consumption of water it would have been informed to the complainant as per provisions. The excess amount demanded by the opposite party from the complainant other than the monthly charges that to be remitted is canceled. It is found that the amount demanded towards the excess consumption of water is in consistant with the provisions.
In the result the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party is directed to adjust the excess amount already remitted by the complainant more than the total of the monthly remitable amount is to be adjusted to the future bills of the complainant. The complainant is also entitled for cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred Only). This is to be complied by the opposite party within one month from the date of receipt of this Order.
Pronounced in Open Forum on this the day of 30th April 2012.
Date of Filing:11.01.2012.
