DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi
CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092
Consumer complaint no. - 394/2013
Date of Institution – 27/05/2013
Date of Order - 25/07/2016
In matter of
Savitri Devi, adult
HN- 259, New Layal pur,
Krishna Nagar, Delhi 110051………………..…..………..…………….Complainant
Vs
1-Zonal Revenue officer
Delhi Jal Board,
Shiv puri, Delhi 110051
2-The Chairman
DJB, Varunalaya
Jhandewalan, New Delhi 110005………….…………………..Respondents
Complainant’s Power of Attorney-Mr.Man Mohan Sharma-
Opponent’s Advocate-Mr Tarun Kumar
Corum- Sh Sukhdev Singh- President
Dr P N Tiwari - Member
Mrs Harpreet Kaur- Member
Order by Dr P N Tiwari, Member
Brief Facts of the case
Complainant, Smt Savitri Devi, senior citizen has nominated her son as attorney to defend the cases on her behalf. Complainant had to construct her house, so she applied to OP1 for disconnection of domestic water connection in April 2008 till her house was not constructed. After construction she applied for reconnection of water connection to OP 1. Complainant had paid Rs 100 as reconnection charges on 04.03/2009 and her water connection was restored.
Complainant did not get water bill till six months after reconnection of water connection, so they contacted OP1, thereafter she received a provisional bill for Rs 2500/- which was subject to adjustment in regular bill. Again she did not get any water bill up to Feb 2013. On 18/03/2013 she received water bill for Rs 48213/- including late payment charges.
Aggrieved by receiving huge amount of bill, complainant approached to OP1 office for clarification when she had paid average bill earlier. Later OP gave a newspaper advertisement for waiving off surcharges and penalty by getting 30 % rebate, if outstanding payment was cleared by July 2013.
Complainant asked for regular water bill from OP1 even after paying the arrears but she could not get the regular water bills since water connection was restored from 2010 onward.
When she did not get bills, she filed this complaint and claimed for issuing of regular water bills from 2009 to 24/09/2012 with waiving of surcharge as late payment and credit amount Rs 2500/- paid against the average bill. Besides this, complainant had also claimed compensation and litigation charges Rs 5000/-
Complaint was scrutinized and notice was served. OP put up their presence and submitted written statement. OP denied allegations of complainant and submitted that OP had generated four bills from 2010 to 2013.It was also submitted that the surcharge and late payment was waived off and also gave 30 % rebate on actual generated bile. Bill for 10 Sept 2010 to 24 Sept 2012 for Rs 43123 including previous arrears Rs 2555/-. Second bill was from 24 Sept 2012 to 02 Mar 2013 for Rs 50623/ including previous arrears Rs 41077 including late payment charges RS 2053/. The third bill was from 02 Mar 2013 to 06 May 2013 for Rs 52412 including previous arrears and late payment. Fourth bill was 06May 2013 to 19June 2013for Rs 21559/-.
According to the OP, complainant had not paid their water bill since long and thus arrears and late payment were added on, but due to the rebate scheme, complainant was given maximum rebate and her late payment charges were also waived off. Therefore this complaint be dismissed.
Complainant filed rejoinder and evidence on affidavit. She stated that average bill amount Rs 2500/ paid by her be adjusted or refunded. She had also stated that compensation expenses be awarded. OP also filed their evidences on affidavit.
Arguments were heard.
By analyzing the facts of complaint, written statement of OP and evidences of both the parties which are on affidavit, it is clear that OP had not issued regular water bills for the period from 2010 to 2013 and issued a huge bill including late payment. When OP did not submit the actual water bills of desired period despite giving ample opportunity, a cost of Rs 10,000/- was imposed on OP.
Aggrieved by the cost imposed, OP preferred Appeal before Honble State Commission at Delhi. The State Commission order in FA 52/2015, set aside the order of this Forum and directed OP to submit the correct bills and submit before
Forum and the cost was waved off.
OP submitted the correct bill for the period from 14Decf 2015 to 17Feb 2016 and an outstanding bill of Rs 7898 was waved off and current bill was of Rs ZERO as per OP’s current scheme. But complainant wanted to get the refund of the same amount which she had paid off and on. But OP submitted that they do not have such provision to revert the payment in cash, but the same will be adjusted in future bills.
On the demand of complainant, the OP referred this case to their higher department and after getting reply, OP credited sum of Rs 7898/- in the account of complainant. The corrected bill was submitted on record.
Complainant submitted that her all the prayer had been accepted except for compensation and litigation charges to be awarded.
Considering the status of the case and delay in issuing the correct water bills to complainant after restoring her water connection and payment of average bill, OP had to issue the water bills as per their system existing at that time.
The delay was seen in not issuing the bills. For this reason, we award compensation of Rs 3500/- for mental harassment. We direct OP to credit this amount in consumer / complainant’s CA account as a deposit which will be reflected in every coming water bill and whenever charges are generated, the same bill amount be deducted from this amount in future water bills in due course, so that complainant should not get mentally harassed. We award Rs 1000/- as litigation charges which will be paid to the complainant.
The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the record room.
(Dr) P N Tiwari - Member Mrs –Harpreet Kaur- Member
Shri Sukhdev Singh - President
