O R D E R
A. Rajesh, President.
1. Shortly stated, the case of the complainant is as follows :
The complainant is a consumer of the opposite party. On 27-07-2008, the opposite party issued a bill to the tune of Rs. 1,62,180/- towards water charge arrears upto June 2009. The average consumption of water is mentioned as 524.6 KL per month instead of 28 KL per month. As per the disputed bill, the water charge per month is fixed at Rs. 12,507/-. The complainant lodged a complaint before the opposite party highlighting his grievances, but there was no response. Thus, the complainant is before us to get the impugned bill set aside and seeking direction against the opposite party to issue a bill based on the actual consumption of water.
2. Version of the opposite party :
The consumer was instructed to replace the water meter and accordingly a new meter had been installed on 19-06-2008, since there was a sudden rise in the water consumption. Since there was some mistake, the complainant was directed to replace the meter so as to rule out any discrepancy. Another new meter was installed on 22-01-2009 and as per the meter the average consumption upto 10-02-2009 was 5 KL per month. However, in the meantime, the opposite party approached their higher officials seeking permission to correct the bills of the complainant. The bill based on the actual consumption will be issued with effect from June 2008 on receiving concurrence from the higher authority. The opposite party requests to dismiss the complaint and seek direction against the complainant to remit the water charges in the proposed bill to be issued by the opposite party.
3. The complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts. A1 to A12 were marked on their side. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the opposite parties. Heard both sides.
4. The points that came up for consideration :-
Whether the complainant is entitled to get set aside Ext. A1 arrear bill?
Whether the complainant is entitled to get a fresh bill based on the actual consumption of water?
5. Point Nos. i) and ii) :- Admittedly, the opposite party seeks time for granting sanction from their high authority to issue a revised bill to the complainant on the basis of the reading in the replaced meter. That means the meter of the complainant had not been working properly and bills issued on the basis of the faulty meter is illegal and unsustainable. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the complainant is not liable to pay the amount as per Ext. A1.
6. Now the question arises, whether the complainant is liable to pay the water charge arrears to the opposite party. The option available before us is to direct the opposite party to take steps to issue a fresh bill under Regulation 13 and 17 of the Water Authority (Water Supply) Regulation 1991. Admittedly, the water charge arrears were pending from 23-01-2008, we think that a direction based on the above Regulation will go to meet the ends of justice in this case.
7. Accordingly, we allow the complaint and order to the extend stated:
We set aside Ext. A1 bill.
The opposite party shall issue a revised bill based on the consumption of water as per the new meter for the period from 23-01-2008 till date as observed above. The amount remitted by the complainant, if any shall be adjusted in the above bill.
The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of May 2011.
