By: Sri. Mohandasan K., President
Complaint in short is as follows:-
1. The complainant is the owner of residential quarters situated at Manjeri Municipality in ward No.4, Nelliparamaba, and there are 6 water connections for the last 20 years. The complainant using the same without any interruption and he is remitting water charges without any failure for the last 20 years. The complainant deposited 15,000/-rupees at the time of availing water connections. When there were interruptions in water supply it was usual to repair the problems within one week of reporting the same. But from 22/12/2021 onwards the water connection stands disrupted. Due to the same the complainant and the occupants of the quarters suffering difficulty due to the non supply of water. When the complainant contacted the opposite party he was told that some of the pipe lines are under repair and so connections has been disconnected completely. The complainant made enquiry at the water authority office but the response was that the complainant should contact the workers who are doing the work of the water authority on contract basis. In effect the opposite parties expressed their inability to resolve the issue. The complainant had contacted the executive engineer Malappuram and he had assured that he will take necessary actions to get the water supply restored. But even after several days did not materialize the assurance given by the executive engineer. Then the complainant contacted the subordinate staffs of opposite party but they responded in an irresponsible manner.
2. The complainant submit that the income from the quarters are the sole source of income of the complainant and due to the lack of water supply some of the residents of the quarters are vacated the quarters. Hence the prayer of the complainant is to provide uninterrupted water supply to the quarters without any further delay. The non-supply of water to the complainant amounts deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The opposite party had issued water bill dated 11/02/2022 for the last two months which is baseless one. Though complainant sent a registered complaint to the opposite party, but there was no reply from the side of opposite party. Hence the prayer of the complainant is to give directions to the opposite party to restore the water supply with immediate effect along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- on account of financial loss suffered by complainant due to the failure of the opposite party to provide uninterrupted water supply.
3. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite parties and they entered appearance and filed version.
4. The opposite parties denied the entire averments in the complaint and submitted that the complaint is filed without any bonofides, experimental basis and so to be dismissed.
5. The opposite parties admitted that the complainant has got water connection and he remitted required fee at the time of availing water connection. The opposite party made attempt to supply water to the complainant in accordance with the availability of water. The opposite party has initiated all the steps to rectify the defects to the water connection. The opposite party denied the allegation that the complainant is not getting water from 2021 December onwards. The opposite party admitted that there was a temporary interruption in water supply which was due to sufficient reason. The allegation that the officers from the office of the opposite party behaved in an irresponsible manner is not correct. But the opposite party staff informed the complainant about their inconvenience. The interruption in water supply was not at all due to the act of the opposite parties. The opposite party further contended that the statement of the complainant that the sole source of the income is from the quarters is not correct statement. The opposite party submitted that the complainant is also having other source of income. The complainant trying to make income from the quarters in a commercial way. None of the residents of the quarters has raised complaint regarding the interruption of water supply. So the contention that the residents vacated from the quarters and thereby caused financial and mental problems to the complainant is not correct. The complainant was regular in payment of water bill, and in case there is advance payment it was usual to adjust towards future bills. The opposite parties solved the complaints mentioned in the notice and so only the reply was not issued to the complainant. The opposite party submit that there is no latches from the side of opposite party and so the complainant is not at all entitled compensation of Rs.50,000/-.
6. The opposite party submitted the real facts as follows: - The water connection of the complainant is situated at Neliparambu Cherani Road. The water pipe line had drawn from the Nelliparambu Areacode road 140 mm PVC line. Due to the renovation work of KSTP on Manjeri-Areacode Road, the water pipe line totally interrupted and so the water line starting from Nelliparambu junction was compelled to close for the time being. The KSTP work was meant to reconstruct the entire road with widening of the same. The old pipe lines could not be retained due to the renovation work. The installation of new pipe lines and providing connections to the nearby houses also was part of the KSTP road work. At present from 2022 March onwards almost the work related to road as well as water connection has completed and the supply of the water also restored. Only because of the road work the water supply to the residence including the complainant caused temporary interruption. All the inconvenience caused was not due to the act of the opposite party. The water pipe line installed by KSTP on the side of Manjeri-Areacode road restored and connected duly in time. The opposite party had informed the complainant while he approached with grievance that in due course of progress of KSTP road work. The opposite party also had enquired about the chance of providing water supply through an alternate way. The complainant was convinced with the attempt of opposite party also. The Kerala water authority duly connected the pipe line which the complainant is getting water from the Kerala water authority. Unfortunately the complainant submitted the complaint hiding the true facts. Hence the submission of the opposite party is that the interruption of water supply was not at all due to any sort of deficiency in service on the part of opposite party but due to the renovation work under taken by KSTP. Hence the opposite party further submit that the cause for the grievance of the complainant being the work done by KSTP and they are also to be made in the party to the proceedings, so the complaint is defective due non-jointer of necessary party. The opposite party submits that considering the true facts, the complaint be dismissed with cost to the opposite party.
7. The complainant and opposite parties filed affidavit and documents. The documents on the side of complainant marked as Ex. A1 to A3. Ext. A1 is copy of complaint dated 06/01/2022. Ext. A2 is copy of notice sent by complainant to the opposite parties. Ext. A3 is copy of water bills. The second opposite party filed affidavit and documents marked as Ext. B1 and B2 (series). Ext. B1 is copy of complaint registered form. Ext. B2 is (series) copy of online bills.
8. Heard complainant, perused affidavit and documents. The opposite party sought time for hearing and it was allowed on payment of cost of Rs.500/- since the complainant was appearing in person. But the opposite party did not pay the cost as ordered.
9. The following points arise for consideration.
Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
Relief and cost?
10. Point No.1 & 2
The complainant submitted that he is having six quarters with water connection of the opposite party and he is in use of the water connection for the last 20 years. It was usual to have interruption of water supply and on registering the complaint the opposite party will redress the grievance within short period of one week. But during the complaint period though the complainant approached the opposite parties with his grievance there was no effective interference from the opposite parties. Moreover the staff of the opposi parties misbehaved towards the complainant. The complainant submits that the income from the quarters is the sole source of his lively hood. Due to interruption in water supply some of the residents left the quarters. Hence, the prayer is to direct uninterrupted water supply by the opposite party and also compensation of Rs.50,000/-.
11. The opposite party admitted certain facts but denied the allegations against the opposite party that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and also the allegation of misbehavior from the side of opposite party staff. As per the averments of the opposite parties there was interruption in water supply which was due to the reconstruction work done by the KSTP and only as part of the same the interruption of water supply was caused. The interruption of water supply was never caused due to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. If at all anybody is responsible for the the interruption to the complainant, it is the KSTP and the contractor their under. It is further submitted that the water connection to the interrupted area has been restored from 2022 March onwards. The opposite party did not sent reply to the notice sent by the complainant since the complaint of the complainant has been rectified immediately.
12. The complainant submitted affidavit stating that during the interrupted period he was compelled to supply water separately to the residents of the quarters. Some of the families vacated the quarters of the complainant due to interruption of water supply. Moreover the opposite party issued water bill which he has not consumed as evident from Ext.A3. The complainant admits that the water connection was restored on 04/04/2022. Now the issue is that whether there were latches on the part of opposite parties which can be considered as deficiency in service and whether there is any acceptable evidence to show the financial loss sustained to the complainant through vacating the quarters by the residents due to interrupted water supply. It can be seen from the affidavit of the opposite party that the interruption of the water supply was caused due to renovation and reconstruction work done by KSTP. There is no reason to discard the contention of the opposite party regarding the cause for interruption of water supply. The complainant submit that he had registered complaint on 06/01/2022 and thereafter 03/02/2022 and the present complaint filed before this commission on 14/03/2022. So it can be perused the grievance of the complainant reckoned from 06/01/2022. The complainant also submitted that the opposite party restored the water connection on 04/04/2022. So, what can be inferred from the affidavit is that the complainant was suffered inconvenience and hardship during the period of 3 months. But the complainant has not produced any document to show the financial loss sustained to him. There is no document to show any of the occupants of the quarter’s shifterd from the quarters during the period. Hence, we find that there is no documentary evidence to show the financial loss sustained to the complainant. But it is a fact that non supply of water to a residential building causes much hardship and inconnvence. But none of the residents claimed any compensation on account of inconnvence and hardship sustained by them due to interrupted water supply. Hence, the commission is not inclined to allow any compensation on account of financial loss sustained by the complainant as claimed in the complaint. But the complainant submitted that the opposite party issued water bills for the disputed period. The complainant produced Ext. A3 series to establish the same. We find that there is no justification for claiming any amount from the complainant during the relevant period i.e., from 06/01/2022 to 04/04/2022. So, the Commission set side Ext. A3 series and declare that the complainant is not liable to pay any amount to the opposite party for the period 06/01/2022 to 04/04/2022 and set side Ext. A3 series. Since we find that the interruption of water supply was not due to the act of the opposite parties we are not considering the compensation. But we find that the complainant is entitled cost of the proceedings. Hence, the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as cost of the proceedings and which can be adjusted towards the future water bills of the complainant.
13. In the light of above fact and circumstances we allow this complaint partly as follows: -
The commission set aside the bills Ext.A3 series and declare that the complainant is not liable to pay any amount for the period from 06/01/2022 to 04/04/2022 and the opposite parties are restrained from collecting any amount form the complainant for the said period.
The opposite parties are directed to pay cost of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.
The opposite parties are permitted to adjust the cost amount towards the future bills of the complaint if the opposite parties like to do so.
The opposite parties are directed pay the amount within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant is entitled for 12% interest from on the said above amount of cost from the date of complaint to till date compliance.
Dated this 7th day of February, 2023.
Mohandasan K., President
Preethi Sivaraman C., Member
Mohamed Ismayil C.V., Member
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant: Ext.A1 to A3
Ext.A1: Copy of complaint dated 06/01/2022
Ext.A2: Copy of notice sent by complainant to the opposite parties.
Ext A3: Copy of water bills.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party: Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party: Ext. B1 and B2
Ext.B1: Copy of complaint registered form.
Ext.B2: (series) copy of online bills.
Mohandasan K., President
Preethi Sivaraman C., Member
Mohamed Ismayil C.V., Member
VPH
