Andhra Pradesh

Kurnool

CC/93/2005

Smt B.Kanyakumari, D/o. C.Nagappa,W/o. Dr. N.B. Bidargaddi, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Commissioner, - Opp.Party(s)

Sri S.Sivaramakrishna Prasad

18 Aug 2005

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/93/2005
 
1. Smt B.Kanyakumari, D/o. C.Nagappa,W/o. Dr. N.B. Bidargaddi,
R/o. H.NO. 15/380-2,Medarigeri, Adoni,Kurnool.
Kurnool
Andhra Pradesh
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Commissioner,
Adoni Municipality, Adoni, Kurnool Dist.
Kurnool
Andhra Pradesh
2. The Chair-Person
Adoni Municipal Council, Adoni, Kurnool Dist.
Kurnool
Andhra Pradesh
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B., MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt.C.Preethi, M.A., L.L.B., MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL

Present: Sri K.V.H.Prasad B.A., LL.B., President

Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy B. Com., LL.B., Member

Thursday the 18th day of August, 2005

CD No. 93/2005

Smt B.Kanyakumari, D/o. C.Nagappa,W/o. Dr. N.B. Bidargaddi,

R/o. H.NO. 15/380-2,Medarigeri,

Adoni,Kurnool.                                                     . . . Complainant.

    -Vs-

1. The Commissioner,

    Adoni Municipality,  Adoni, Kurnool Dist.

2. The Chair-Person,

    Adoni Municipal Council,  Adoni,

    Kurnool Dist.                                . . . Opposite parties

 

          This complaint coming on 17.08.2005 for arguments in the presence of Sri S.Sivaramakrishna Prasad, Advocate for complainant, Sri V.Sriramulu, Advocate for opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 set exparte and stood over for consideration till this day the Forum made the following.

 

O R D E R

 

1.       This CD case of the complainant is filed under section 12 of Consumer protection act seeking direction on the opposite parties to repair the water tap connection of the complainant’s house in Door No. 15/380-2 of Medarigeri, Adoni, Kurnool, dt and for payment of Rs.20,000/- as compensation and costs of this case along with other reliefs which the exigencies of the case demand. 

2.       The brief facts of the complainant’s case are that on 1.4.2003 the officials of the opposite party dug a pit for installing water pipe connections to the neighboring house and in that process the tap connections of the complainant’s house damaged, resulting in disruption of the water supply to the complainant’s house.  In spite of several requests and notice dt 23.8.2004 to get it repaired the opposite parties paid a deafear and the said conduct of the opposite party ensured deficiency of service to the complainant as a regular tax payee besides causing mental agony. 

3.       In pursuance of the receipt of the notice of this case of the complainant, while the opposite party No.2 remained absent to the case proceedings, and set exparte, the opposite party No.1 contested the case by filing a written version denying of the complainant’s case and exhibiting its rediness to attended the repair of the complainant’s tap connections provided it is applied by the complainant with necessary chalan and as there is no such endeavor on the part of the complainant, seeks the dismissal of the complaint with costs. 

4.       In substation of the contentions while the complainant’s side has made reliance on the sworn affidavit of herself in reiteration of its case and documentary record in Ex A.1 to A.3 the opposite party No.1 relied upon its sworn affidavit in reiteration of its defence stands.  Both the sides file their written arguments in support of their case contention.

5.       Hence the point for consideration is whether the complainant had made out any deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties enabling her self for the claim made.

6.       As the opposite party is not denying the status of the complainant as water tap connection holder, the tax receipts and demand notices which envisages the said status of complainant doesn’t require any further appreciation, as the opposite party disputes the allegations of the complaint as to the damage occurred to the water pipe line to the complainant house at the alleged digging acts of the public heath side personal of the opposite party and requiring the complainant to pay necessary fees through chalan for getting the said repairs attended to said service tap connection of the complainant. 

7.       The Ex A.1 xerox copy of the application of the complainant, the original of which was said to have been addressed to the opposite party No.1 alleging the damage to the complainant’s pipe line, while the Public Health Center personal dug for laying pipe lines and Asst Engineer directing her to addressed to commissioner for necessary permission when she was approached the said Asst Engineer, and the said damage occurs to pipe line was not set right.    Neither the written version pleading of the opposite party No.1 nor the written arguments of opposite party No.1 denie or dispute the said Ex A.1 or its contents.  

8.       The Ex A.2 is a xerox true copy of Registered notice dated 24.7.2004 caused to the opposite party No.1 by the compliant reiterating the damage occurred to the water pipe line of the complainant that the hand of the personal of Public Health Center while digging pipe line and inconvenience being suffered by the complainant as the said damage was not rectified in-spite of several approaches.  No material of earlier nature i.e prior to the filing of this case appears form the opposite party side discrediting the truth and the bonafidies of the contents and correctness of Ex A.1 and A.2.  Nor the said Ex A.1 and A/2 appears to have been either responded as needed, or replied suitable by the opposite party.  Hence the denial of the opposite party as to the said cause of the complainant appears to be an eleventh hour thought without any merit and force worthy of consideration. 

9.       The Ex.A.3 is the xerox true copy of Registered legal notice dated 23.8.2004 issued by the complainant to the opposite party in reiteration of the fact of damage to her water tap pipe line at the digging taken by Public Health Center Personel for laying pip lines and non rectification of said damage in-spite of said earlier requests and the inconvenience suffered at that and requesting for  its rectification within 10 days of the said notice and in default for resorting to legal action for Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony, Rs.50,000/- towards damages  and Rs.20,000/- as costs besides to Rs.500/- as the said legal notice charges.  The said notice also was neither replied nor responded with any positive action by the opposite party.  Nor any proper explanation for such lapsive conduct appears either in the written version or written arguments of the opposite party.

10.     The stand of the complainant as to the damage occur to her water tap pipe line at the acts of Public Health Center Personnel digging for laying pipe line was not denied at the earliest opportunity provided to the opposite parties at the receipt of Ex A.1 to A.3.  The opposite party No.1 except denying the said fact for the first time in the written pleadings did not place any such material to prove falsity in it or to doubt the bonafidies of said consistent contentions of the complainant’s grievances.  If the said consistent contentions of the complainant as to damage occur to her water tap pipe line are in correct, the opposite party could have denied it at the earliest opportunity offered to him vide ExA.1 to A.3 or at least would have placed the affidavit of said Public Health Center Personnel in denial of the facts of said damage alleged by the complainant.  Further the omitive conduct of the opposite party in not placing any statutory provision warranting the payment of Chelan for attending the requirement of the complainant. Is ensuing any amount of doubt on the bonafidies of the opposite party contention and requiring the complainant to pay Challan for attending the said requirement to the complainant’s water tap line.  

11.     Hence, in the said circumstance there appear every deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties in seeking the complainant to have the tap water supply without any inconvenience, especially when the complainant is not alleged as defaulter of property tax or water tap tax.  The disruption to water supply for considerable period which is not supposed to the complainant at the deficiency of opposite party can certainly ensue, an account of said untold misery, any quantum of mental agony and so these by the complainant entitled the compensation for said mental agony.

12.     Further as the opposite parties by their in a-lert conduct for years together the requirements to the complainants water tap pipe line occasioned an account of the digging work taken up by Public Health Center Personnel a laying pipe lines, not only cased loss of hope in the goodness of the opposite party for redressal of the complainant grievances but also driven the complainant to the Forum for legal remedy, the opposite parties are remaining liable to the costs of the complaint in presenting the matters before this Forum.

13.     Hence, in the circumstances a direction to the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony suffer by the complainant at the omitting conduct of the opposite party and their deficiency in rendering proposal service to the complainant, and an amount of Rs.5,000/- as costs to the complainant for prosecuting the matters before the Forum under a further direction  to the opposite party for rectification of said inconvenience caused to the supply of water tap pipe line of the complainant within a month of the receipt of this order, appears to serve the ends of justice. 

14.     Hence, the opposite parties jointly and severally directed to pay to the complainant RS.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony suffered and Rs.5,000/- as costs within a month of the receipt of this order in default of the compliance of direction for rectification ordered supra the opposite parties further jointly and severally shall pay a further sum of Rs.10,000/- as damages with an interest at 12percent per annum from said default till realization.

 

Dictation to the Stenographer Type to the dictation corrected by us pronounced in the Open court this the 18th day of August, 2005.

PRESIDENT

          MEMBER                                                                       MEMBER

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For the complainant                                                       For the opposite parties

           -Nil-                                                                              -Nil-

List of Exhibits Marked for the complainant

Ex A.1 Xerox copy of the application of the complainant addressed to the opposity Party No.1 dated 18.06.2004..

Ex A.2 The Registered notice dated 24.07.2004 of the complainant to the opposite Party No.1 (True copy).

Ex A.3 Is the Xerox true copy of Registered legal notice dated 23.8.2004 issued by the complainant to the opposite party.

 

List of Exhibits Marked for the opposite party.

 

                   -Nil-

 

 

PRESIDENT

                                                                                                MEMBER

 

Copy to:-

 

1. Sri S.Siva Ramakrishna Prasad, Advocate, Kurnool for the complainant.

2. Sri V.Sriramulu, Advocate, Kurnool for the opposite party No.1.

3. The Chair-Person, Adoni Municipal Council, Adoni, Kurnool Dist.

                                     

Copy was made ready on:

Copy was dispatched on :

Copy was delivered to parties:

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B.,]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt.C.Preethi, M.A., L.L.B.,]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.