C.C. No. 34 /2009


Between


Smt. G. Pistha Bai, W/o L.M.Gyanchand Jain,
Aged 51 years, Jain, House-wife, residing at
Dr.No. 14-150, Boya Street, Palamaner Town
and Mandal, Chittoor District.
… Complainant.

And

The Palamaner Municipality, Palamaner,
Rep., by its Commissioner, Palamaner Town
& Mandal, Chittoor District.

… Opposite Party.

This complaint coming on before us for final hearing on 06.04.2009 and upon perusing the complaint, written versions, affidavits, material documents and on hearing Sri S. Balaiah, counsel for the complainant, and opposite party is remained exparte and having stood over till this day for consideration, the Forum made the following:-

ORDER

DELIVERED BY SRI. V. PARTHASARADHI RAO, B.A., L.L.B., President
ON BEHALF OF THE BENCH



This is a complaint filed by the complainant U/Sec. 12 of Consumer Protection Act against the opposite party for restoration of the water tap connection disconnected by the opposite party and to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service.

The complainant submits that she is resident of house bearing Door No.14-150 in Boya Street, Palamaner Town. She obtained Muncipal water tap connection from the opposite party in the year 1998 by paying necessary connection charges of Rs. 2,500/- as per the directions of the opposite party. He is paying regularly water tax and property tax and other taxes, in respect of his house to the opposite party without any default. He is not due any amount to the opposite party. She also paid water charges for the year 2006-07 an amount of Rs. 500/- and for the year 2007-08 Rs. 500/-. On 05.01.2009 when they were not in the house the subordinates of the opposite party disconnected the tap connection of his house without notice to her. On 08.01.2009 when she returned to her house, he noticed disconnection of the water tap connection to her house and he approached the opposite party and requested them to restore the water tap connection to her house. The opposite party has not responded to his request. Therefore she gave legal notice dt. 25.01.2009 to the opposite party to restore the water tap connection to her house. But the opposite party failed to render service to her. Therefore she filed this complaint for restoration of water tap connection to her house and to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony. The complaint may be allowed.

The opposite party is served with notice of this complaint on 09.03.2009 and the opposite party called absent and remained exparte.

On the basis of averments, the following points arise for consideration :
1) Whether the opposite party disconnected the water tap connection of the house of the complainant without any reason? If so whether the opposite party committed deficiency in service ?


2) To what relief ?



The complainant filed Chief Affidavit of PW-1 and marked Ex.A1 to A6.
The Chief Affidavit of PW-1 and Written Arguments of the complainant are one and the same.


Point No. 1 :-
The case of the complainant is that she is resident of house bearing Door No. 14-150, Boya Street, Palamaner Town. She obtained water tap connection to her house in the year 2008 and was paying regularly water charges. Ex.A1 is the receipt of the deposit amount of Rs. 2,500/- for obtaining water tap connection on 03.11.1993. Ex.A2 and A3 are receipts for the year 2006-08 for Rs.500/- each towards water charges. The complainant submits that she is not due any amount to the opposite party/ Municipality, when she was absent in her house the subordinates of the opposite party disconnected water connection of her house without any notice to her and put her in trouble and mental stress and strain. On 08.01.2009 when she returned to her home, she noticed the disconnection of her house and approached the opposite party and requested them to restore the water connection to her house. As the opposite party did not respond to her, request she gave legal notice Ex.A5 dt. 25.01.2009 informed the opposite party that she is regularly paying water charges to the Municipality and she is not a defaulter and her water tap connection was disconnected on 05.01.2009 and requested to resotre the same. Inspite of legal notice Ex.A5 the opposite party has not given reply nor restored the water connection to her house and so, she filed this complaint.

A perusal of the receipts Ex.A1 to A3 shows that the complainant is regularly paying water charges whatever demanded by the opposite party. The opposite party have not given reply to the legal notice Ex.A5 dt. 25.01.2009. Ex.A6 is the courier receipt addressed to the Commissioner, Palamaner Municipality, Palamaner. On the basis of notice Ex.A6 the learned counsel for the complainant contends that the complainant sent legal notice dt. 25.01.2009 to the opposite party and the opposite party has not issued reply notice to the complainant nor restored the water tap connection to her house. As the opposite party failed to restore the water tap connection to her house, the complainant filed this complaint. After filing this complaint this Forum sent notices to the opposite party and the same was served on it on 09.03.2009. Even after service of notice the opposite party did not appear before this Forum and remained exparte. Therefore the silence on the part of opposite party in not giving reply to this complaint amounts that there is no reply to the complaint and so the opposite party did not appear before this Forum.

In those circumstances and after perusing Ex.A2 and A3 receipts for payment of water charges, I am of the view that the complainant is not due any amount to the opposite party. The complainant says that her tap connection was disconnected by opposite party on 05.01.2009 and it was not restored so far in spite of her legal notice Ex.A5. When she complained against the opposite party and the opposite party did not respond to it and remained exparte. I believe the version of the complainant that the opposite party without any reason disconnected the water tap connection of the complainant. Therefore the complainant made out a case against the opposite party that it failed to render service, even after collecting water charges and committed deficiency in service. Hence the complainant is entitled to restoration of water tap connection to her house, besides compensation for disconnecting the water tap connection. Therefore the complainant is awarded compensation of Rs. 3,000/- towards deficiency in service and she is also entitled to restoration of water tap connection to her house. This point is answered in favour of complainant.

Point No. 2 :-
In the result the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to restore the water tap connection immediately after receipt of this order and pay Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousands only) towards compensation for deficiency in service and Rs. 500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards costs of the complaint. The opposite party is directed to pay the said amount within 6 weeks from the date of order.