DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 2nd day of December 2019
Present: Smt.Shiny.P.R, President
: Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
: Smt.Vidya.A, Member Date of Filing: 30/11/2017
CC/181/2017
P.Dasan,
S/o.Unnichaman,
Parappulakkal Veedu, - Complainant
Chethallur.P.O,
Mannarkkad College(Via),
PIN – 678 583.
(By Adv.Anjana)
Vs
1. The Assistant Engineer,
Kerala Water Authority,
P.H.Section, Mannarkkad.
2. The Assistant Executive Engineer,
Kerala Water Authority, - Opposite parties
P.H.Sub Division, Ottapalam.
(By Adv.K.A.Stanly James)
O R D E R
By Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
Brief facts of the case are explained below.
The complaint has taken water connection under Chethallur Fresh Water Project which comes within the jurisdiction of Kerala Water Authority Mannarkkad PH Section. Complainant’s connection No. is 379/TKRA/D. Complainant pleads that he is paying water tax promptly, so far he has not made any water tax arrears. But as per bill No.26106260 dated 12/05/2017 complainant was levied Rs.20,705/- additional charge by the opposite parties. When he enquired about this at Mannarkkad Section Office, he understood that this is the additional charge for using excess water. According to the complainant for the stated amount he has not used water and he does not know whether the mistake is in meter reading or in the water meter. According to the complainant after meter reading taken on 20/07/2016 the next meter reading was taken only on 16/03/2017 after a passage of 10 months; that during this period excess water was consumed by the complainant is the argument of Kerala Water Authority. As per rule, reading should be taken in every two months and if meter reading is taken once in two months it can be ascertained whether this is the defect of the meter or excess water is actually consumed. Complainant pleads that after the passage of 10 months taking meter reading stating that the excess water is consumed, by way of excess charge a big amount is levied on the consumer and this amounts to unfair trade practice and inhuman practice. The request was given by the complainant on 02/06/2017 to Mannarkkad Assistant Engineer requesting him to waive this big amount. On 17/09/2017 to Ottapalam Sub Division Assistant Executive Engineer also the request was given for the above purpose, but upto this date no reply was given by them. Complainant further pleads that he has 15 ½ cents of land in which no cultivation is done his family consists of 04 members. In no case this much water is consumed by them. At this time no construction works were also done by them. The house work is completed many years ago. According to the complainant to exempt this amount of water tax complainant many times went to Kerala Water Authority’s Mannarkkad office and to its Ottapalam Sub Division Office but no steps were taken by those authorities. Complainant is aged 71 years and belongs to a poor scheduled caste family. For the last 08 years he has undergone treatment for heart disease. In demand notice for meter reading taken after 12/05/2017, the said big amount was recorded as arrears. Since no final decision is taken in this matter, complainant has suffered physically and mentally. As a result of mental difficulty and tension, heart pain occurred to the complainant and he was under treatment in Perinthalmanna EMS Hospital for 05 days. The two monthly water tax mentioned in the notice has been paid without default by the complainant. According to the complainant, if this big amount is not paid, taking legal steps including revenue recovery steps the amount will be recovered which was orally told to him by the Kerala Water Authority authorities. It was the service deficiency occurred on the part of Kerala Water Authority due to which complainant was given this big amount bill by the Kerala Water Authority as pleaded by the complainant. The complainant prays to this Hon’ble Forum to exempt him from payment of Rs.20,705/-(Rupees Twenty thousand Seven hundred and Five only) plus fine imposed on him, to pay him a compensation of Rs.70,000/-(Rupees Seventy thousand only) including postage, stationery, photostat expenses.
The complaint was admitted and notices were sent to the opposite parties who entered their appearance and filed their version. In the version jointly filed by the 1st and 2nd opposite parties, except those expressly admitted, these opposite parties deny the averments in the complaint. This complaint does not stand legally or factually, the complaint is not bonafide and the complaint is filed experimentally stating false reasons. Hence according to these opposite parties this complaint should be dismissed. According to these opposite parties complainant is a consumer with consumer No.379/TKRA/D in Kerala Water Authority Mannarkkad Section. These opposite parties also agree to the statement in the complaint that as per bill No.26106260 dated 12/05/2017 issued to the complainant Rs.20,705/- additional amount was charged from him and when the complainant enquired at Mannarkkad Section Office of Kerala Water Authority he understood that this additional charge was for consuming excess water. According to these opposite parties this excess charge is after deducting the provisional charge. These opposite parties deny that the complainant is a prompt payer of water tax and also deny the statement that for the said amount water was not consumed by the complainant. The law that once in 2 months meter reading should be taken is not prevailing in Kerala Water Authority and if meter reading is observed the rate of usage can be known. As per Kerala Water Authority law, water meter has to be maintained and protected by the complainant and the complainant can himself examine and ascertain the rate of water usage, as contended by these opposite parties. In the above consumer No. from 7/14 to 4/16 average monthly usage is 33000 liter water. As per 20/07/2016 meter reading from May 2016 to July 2016 average consumption is 28 kilo liters(28000 liters) on 27/09/2016, reading could not be taken. Particulars of the consumer were entered in the computer on 16/03/2017 at Rs.254/- per month for 28 KLs bill was given and reading on that date was taken. The reading on 16/03/2017 was 2951 KLs and as per that consumer’s usage from 8/16 to 2/17 was 103 KLs/month. The rate for this usage is Rs.2,839/-. The difference in the rate in this period was the additional amount mentioned in the second bill. After receiving this bill consumer’s consumption is comparatively low(28 KLs/month) during 7/16 to 3/17 period consumer’s usage was found excessive. After 27/07/2016, when for taking meter reading on 27/09/2016 Kerala Water Authority officials went to complainant’s house, door was locked and reading could not be taken. Therefore these opposite parties deny the complainant’s statement that for 10 months period reading was not taken is false. For not taking meter reading on 27/09/2016 Kerala Water Authority is not responsible. According to these opposite parties when complainant came to this office with complaint regarding billing, about the bill amount and how additional amount is calculated, was clearly explained to him. There is no fault in the complainant’s meter which is clear from reading taken before and after the period of occurrence of excess consumption because from the consumption before the usage has been reduced to 1/3rd from 33 KLs to 12 KLs. Hence for that period actually excess usage has occurred. The complainant has remitted only the provisional bill of 13/03/2017. These opposite parties also contend that the complainant consumer was a defaulter in payment of water charge. After December 2014, in 7/15, in 12/15 and 7/16 water tax was paid by the complainant. According to these opposite parties only during a fixed period usage increased which is actual usage and the bill for the same should be remitted by the complainant consumer. These opposite parties also contend that the size of consumer’s land, his family members size has no relation with water consumption and from the complaint, complainant has admitted that he is a heart patient and these opposite parties deny the complainant statement in the complaint in this connection. The bill is prepared on 13/11/2017, the reading is taken on 15/11/2017 on which the complainant consumer is given the water bill. From the records produced by the complainant that the complainant is admitted in the hospital on 10/11/2017 itself is clear. For the physical, mental depression, mental difficulty, tension, these opposite parties are not responsible. From these opposite parties no deficiency in service has occurred and for the water consumed by the complainant after deducting provisional bill amount paid by the complainant additional bill is given to him. This bill is legal and lawfully given bill as per the condition in the contract entered into between the complainant and the opposite parties, for payment of which complainant is liable. For the hospital bill these opposite parties are not responsible. In Kerala Water Authority irrespective of caste and creed, water bill is equal for all. To the complaint against these opposite parties there is no reason for litigation legally, also the compensation demanded by the complainant is very big which the complainant is not entitled to get; also for no relief demanded in the complaint which the complainant is entitled hence these opposite parties pray to this Forum for accepting their contentions and dismissing this complaint with cost to these opposite parties.
Complaint filed IA 59/18 for causing production of separate bill by opposite parties and opposite parties produced available documents. Complainant filed chief affidavit so also the opposite parties. Exts.A1 to A14 were marked from the side of the complainant, except Exts.A5 to A8 which were marked subject to proof. Exts.B1 to B4 were marked from the side of the opposite parties. Complainant and the opposite parties were also heard.
The following issues arise for consideration by this Forum.
- Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice committed by the opposite parties in this case?
- If so, the relief and cost available to the complainant?
Issues 1 and 2 in detail
Complainant has produced Exts.A1, A2, A3, A9, A10, A11, A12, A13 and A14 to prove his pleas and the opposite parties have filed Exts.B1 to B4 to prove their contentions. Exts.A1 is the meter reading card issued by Kerala Water Authority Mannarkkad which states complainant’s consumer number, meter number, initial meter reading and date of connection. It also reveals meter readings on different dates upto 15/10/2015. As per Ext.A2 on 16/03/2017 complainant’s meter reading was 2951 KLs and total payable amount was Rs.1,022/-. Ext.A9 is the discharge summery issued by EMS Memorial Co-operative Hospital and Research Centre, Perinthalmanna dated 15/11/2017 which shows specialty as cardiology and interventional cardiology. Ext.A10 is meter reading information after 15/10/2015 between 20/07/2016 and 16/03/2017 as per the meter reading complainant has consumed 813 KLs of water and the complainant consumer has paid between 04/12/2015 and 12/04/2017 Rs.6,372/- towards water charge. Ext.A13 is the demand cum disconnection notice issued by the opposite parties to the complainant dated 13/09/2017 which shows reading on 15/09/2017 as 3016 KLs and total payable amount is Rs.21,002/-. Ext.A14 is the demand cum disconnection notice dated 13/11/2017 issued by the opposite parties to the complainant, which shows meter reading as 3040 KLs as on 15/11/2017 and total payable amount is Rs.21,116/-. Ext.B1 is a copy of consumer personal ledger maintained by the opposite parties which shows meter readings on different dates between 16/07/2014 and 15/05/2017 and total amount payable. Ext.B2 shows payment details as per consumer personal ledger maintained by the opposite parties which shows amounts paid by the complainant and their receipt numbers. It also shows meter reading details and PIC details in respect of consumer number TCH/379/D. Ext.B3 is the table to compute revised water tariff w.e.f. 01/10/2014 of Kerala Water Authority for domestic consumers which shows total amount payable for various ltrs. of consumption per month.
We have perused the affidavits and documentary evidences produced by the both the parties in this case before this Forum and we understand that the complainant has sought excluding him from payment of Ext.A2 bill amount of Rs.20,705/- charged on him plus fine levied on him. We also observe that there is clear negligence and omission committed by the opposite parties by not taking water meter readings of the complainant consumer regularly and not issuing additional bills regularly which is quite clear from meter reading card produced by the complainant(Ext.A1). Ext.A1 shows that after meter reading taken on 17/01/2012 only on 07/11/2012 meter reading has been taken by the opposite parties similarly after taking meter reading on 24/05/2011 meter reading was taken only after six months on 17/01/2012. As per regulation 13 of the Kerala Water Supply Regulation Kerala Water Authority is bound to record the meter readings at an interval of six months, but it is clear from Ext.A10 and consumer personal ledger produced by the opposite parties that meter reading was taken in July 2016 and thereafter the meter reading was taken only in March 2017 which proves negligence and omission on the part of the opposite parties in taking meter reading regularly, issuance of additional bills to the complainant at an interval of six months. Further we also observe that during the period covered by the additional bill number 26106260 dated 12/05/2017 issued by the opposite parties the complainant had no occasion to consume large quantity of water because of which additional bill for Rs.20,705/- was issued to him and also he is not seen doing agricultural activities which require huge quantity of water for the purpose of irrigation. We also view that the details of the disputed Ext.A2 bill are not seen in the consumer personal ledger produced by the opposite parties before this Forum. Hence we observe that issuance of Ext.A2 additional bill is in violation of the regulation 13 of the Kerala Water Supply Regulation which can be seen as deficiency in service committed by the opposite parties. We may also note the decision by the Hon’ble Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram in the case of Assistant Executive Engineer, Kerala Water Authority and anr. vs. the Bishop of Quilon. “Admittedly the first opposite party issued the additional bill dated 26.11.2019 for Rs.12,791/- and that the said additional bill was issued for the period ranging from June 1995 to April 1999. There can be no doubt about the fact that as per the Provisions of Regulations 13, of the Kerala Water Supply Regulations, the Kerala Water Authority is bound to record the meter readings at an interval of 6 months. Ext.D1 and D2 Consumer Personal Ledger and meter reading register would make it clear that the opposite parties Kerala Water Authority totally failed in recording the meter readings at an interval of 6 months. Ext.D1 and D2 would make it clear that the meter reading was taken in July 1995 and thereafter the net reading was taken in February 1998. Likewise, the meter reading was taken in April 1994 and thereafter the same was taken in July 1995. Thus, there was negligence or omissions on the part of the first opposite party in taking meter readings. The first opposite party is duty bound to issue additional bill if any at an interval of 6 months. In this case the first opposite party issued Ext.P2 bill for a period from June 1995 to April 1999. The issuance of Ext.P2 additional bill for Rs.12,791/- can be treated an action in violation of the provisions contained in Regulation 13 of Water Supply Regulations. Thus, the forum below has rightly cancelled the Ext.P2 additional bill for Rs.12,791/-. Moreover, the opposite parties have not succeeded in establishing their case regarding excess consumption of water. The original meter reading register or consumer personal ledger had not been produced before the forum below. The person who made entries in the original of Ext.D1 and D2 registers had not been examined. Thus, in all respects the demand of Rs.12,791/-by way of additional bill for a period from June 1995 to April 1999 can be treated as a sort of deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. So, the order passed by the forum below cancelling Ext.P2 bill for Rs.12,791/- is to be upheld”.
At the same time we observe that complainant has not proved that the meter reading shown on 16/03/17 or after that are not correct and also the complainant is seem to have failed to prove that the Ext.A2 bill is not correct because as per Ext.A10 the meter reading on 15/09/2017 is 3016 KLs as per the information provided under the RTI Act. Also the complainant has not prayed for cancellation of Ext.A2 bill. Further the opposite parties have also contended that as part of the computerization of Kerala Water Authority office at Mannarkkad all officials were engaged in entering and uploading date to the system and hence no readings were recorded after September 2016 till March 2017 of the consumers which include the complainant.
Taking into consideration all the above the complaint is partly allowed.
We order the opposite party 1 and 2 jointly and severally to pay a compensation of Rs.4,000/-(Rupees Four thousand only) towards mental agony suffered by the complainant because of very big excess amount bill issued to him by the opposite parties and to pay Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) jointly and severally to the complainant towards cost of this proceedings. The plea of the complainant to exempt him from the payment of amount of water tax arrears of Rs.20,705/- cannot be allowed because as per Kerala Water Authority Law water meter has to be maintained and protected by the complainant and complainant should examine and ascertain the rate of water usage by him regularly. Also we observe that complainant has no case that the meter is fault and he is no dispute regarding the meter reading of 20138 KLs on 20/07/2016.
This order shall be executed within one month from the date of receipt of this order; otherwise complainant is also entitled to receive interest @ 9% 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 2nd day of December 2019.
Sd/-
Shiny.P.R
President
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan
Member
Sd/-
Vidya.A
Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 – Meter reading card issued by opposite party to the complainant.
Ext.A2 – Demand and Disconnection Notice issued by the opposite party to the complainant
dated 16/03/2017 and 15/5/17.
Ext.A3 – Copy of petition sent to the Assistant Engineer by the complainant dated 02/06/2017
Ext.A4 – Copy of petition sent to the Assistant Executive Engineer by the complainant dated 17/09/2017
Ext.A5 – Copy of tax receipt dated 17.4.12.(subject to proof)
Ext.A6 – Copy of ration card (subject to proof)
Ext.A7 – Copy of Aadhar card (subject to proof)
Ext.A8- Copy of Community certificate(subject to proof)
Ext.A9 – Discharge summary issued by the EMS Memorial Co-operative Hospital & Research Centre,
Perinthalmanna to the complainant.
Ext.A10 – Reply under RTI Act in connection with meter reading given by the opposite party to the
complainant.
Ext.A11 – Copy of inpatient bill issued by the EMS Memorial Co-operative Hospital & Research
Centre, Perinthalmanna dated 10/11/17 to the complainant.
Ext.A12 – Copy of discharge bill issued by the EMS Memorial Co-operative Hospital & Research Centre,
Perinthalmanna dated 15/11/17 to the complainant.
Ext.A13- Demand and Disconnection Notice issued by the opposite party to the complainant
dated 15/9/17.
Ext.A14- Demand and Disconnection Notice issued by the opposite party to the complainant
dated 15/11/17.
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite Parties
Ext.B1 - copy of consumer personal ledger of complainant maintained by the opposite party.
Ext.B2 - Copy of complainant’s computerized personal ledger maintained by the opposite party.
Ext.B3 - Copy of revised water tariff of Kerala Water Authority.
Ext.B4 - True Copy of standard Agreement of Kerala Water Authority.
Witness examined on the side of complainant
NIL
Witness examined on the side of opposite parties
NIL
Cost Rs.2,000/-
