D.o.F:12/08/2011

D.o.O:08/12/11

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                      CC.205/11

                   Dated this, the 08th   day of  December 2011.

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                          : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                      : MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G.                          : MEMBER

1.Chandran.K.A,

Moodamkulam, Po.Karadka,                               : Complainants

Kasaragod.

2. Ambika, W/o Chandran

(in person)

The Managing Committee Secretary/President

Karmanthody Vadekke Shuddajala Samith ,          : Opposite party

Reg.No.107/05 ,Po.Karadka

(in person)

ORDER

SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER

        The facts of the case in brief are as follows:

          Karmanthody Vadekke Shuddajala SamithI  is a  registered  samithi under the government scheme of  Jalanidhi  for supply of drinking water.  The complainants are he consumers of the said samithi since 2006 onwards.  The scheme of the project  is meant for the supply of  drinking water to those  who are having no wells or any other source of water.  But most of the members of the scheme were  financially sound and they are having wells and bore wells and those peoples are controlling the scheme.  The complainants were paid  `2250/- as initial deposit and they are also paying monthly water charges of ` 60/-.  The remaining expense will met by the government. The complainants were residing  in their family house at the time when they obtained the membership from the Samithi and now they constructed a new house near to the family house.   Now the complainant  shifted their pipeline from their family house to  their newly constructed house.  The distance  between old pipe line to the new pipeline is 30 meters and the complainants themselves met the expenses for shifting.  According to the complainant the shifting will not necessitate a separate  membership or separate consumer card.  But the committee imposed `2500/- as penalty for the shifting and the complainants are not ready to pay the same.  Hence this complaint is filed alleging illegal act for  making money by the opposite parties.

2.  Opposite party filed their version.  According to  them  the Karmanthody Vadekke Shuddajala Samithi is registered  society  working  under the government scheme of Jalanidhi for supplying   drinking water. For the above  project the investment of government   is 75%, and 10% met by  Grama Panchayath and 15% met by  consumers.  While  the   samithi  started  its functioning with 36 members  including the complainants,  Samithi consists of 11 elected active members and from which  one President , Secretary, Treasurer, vice president and joint secretary.  As per the  bylaw  of the Samithi all the members are bound to obey the decisions taken by the  general body while fixing pipeline for the water supply the complainants  were residing in their family houses and the  sketch and plan of the pipe line was approved and copies were submitted to Jalanidhi authority.  Later  the  complainant constructed a new house and requested for transfer   of pipe line to his new house.  At that time the samithi gave permission to shift the  pipeline on condition  to pay  `2500/- to the samithi.  The complainant  shifted  the pipeline without  paying the  above said amount. Thereafter the  members of the samithi unanimously  demanded that the   complainant should remit the penalty imposed by the samithi, as 6 other persons remitted the penalty imposed by the samithi without  any complaint.  The samithi  have not taken any strict measures to cut the  water connection of the complainant.  According to the opposite party the complainants have not submitted any written complaint before the samithi or Grama Panchayath.  The opposite parties also denied all the allegations made against  them by the complainants.  Hence the complaint has no merit and it is liable to be dismissed.

3.  Exts.A1 to A7  marked on the side of complainant and Ext. B1 marked on the side of opposite party .  No oral  evidence is adduced by either parties.  Heard both sides and documents perused.

4.  The issues  raised for consideration  are

1. Whether the penalty imposed by the  opposite party against the complainant is illegal  or not?

2. if so what is the order as relief and cost?

5.   Here the complainants already shifted their pipeline from old house to new house and now the question whether penalty  imposed by the samithi is illegal or not?  Here the opposite party have  no case that the complainant shifted the water connection  forcefully or without the consent of the opposite party.  Only after shifting the water connection the opposite party imposed penalty.  As per the bylaws of the water supply scheme “ a beneficiary of the scheme   transferred his water connection to another person the  newcomer  will not get the admission without paying `2500/-.  A person  will get admission  only  an payment of a  donation of `2500/-.   On the basis of this  the opposite party  imposed fine to complainant.  Here the complainants have not taken any new connection they only shifted their existing connection  to new house which is situating 30 meters away  from the old connection.  Moreover it is specifically stated in the bylaw that an amount of `2500/- as  ‘donation’.  Nobody can compel a person to pay donation.  It is the desire and will of the donour to  donate any amount.  Moreover the Samithi is formed not to make profit but to serve its members.  On seeing Ext.B1 the Samithi is working for  making profit and it is taking coercive  steps  against its members.  The  purpose of the  very same project is to  help the people who are having no drinking water facilities.  The purpose is service and not making unlawful gain. The Samithi  is not supposed  to take any personal revenge against its members.   Moreover on shifting of the pipeline by the complainant will not cause any damage or  extra expense to the Samithi.   The  major  expense ie 85%  is met by government and Grama Panchayath jointly.  The Samithi have no case that the  amount collected by them from  its members as water charges is insufficient for the functioning  of the Samithi.  Moreover there is no case that the complainants are defaulters of water charges.  On  concluding all the aspects mentioned above it is clear that the act of the Samithi in imposing the fine against the complainant is illegal and the act of the Samithi will not serve the intention of the government to serve the people.  Hence  we are of the opinion that the complaint has got  some merits.

    Therefore the complaint is allowed and the opposite parties are restrained from collecting `2500/- from the complainant as penalty imposed and  opposite parties are further restrained from interfering the peaceful enjoyment of the water connection which  he enjoying  now.  Both parties have to bear their own respective costs.

Exts:

A1-consent  for  transferring water connection

A2-copy of consumer card

A3 to A7-  receipts for water charges

B1-copy of minutes extracts

MEMBER                             MEMBER                                   PRESIDENT

eva