ORDER

SRI.H.R. SRINIVAS, PRESIDENT

1.     This is the complaint filed by the complainants against the Opposite Parties (herein referred to as OPs) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for the deficiency of service in removing their name in respect of water meter No.E22876/28-324 without issuing any notice before change and for resuming their names in respect of the said meter and for cost and other reliefs as the commission deems fit.

2.     In the beginning the complaint was filed by the complainants against the Asst. Executive Engineer and SE2 BWSSB HAL 2^nd Bangalore and secretary BWSSB Cauvery Bhavan Bangalore OP-1 & 2. After wards, one Jayanthi and One Varun Sai Sridhar got themselves impleaded by making an application which was allowed by this commission as OP-3 and 4. Afterwards complainants filed the amended copy of the of the complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. 

3.     The brief facts of the complaint are: Complainants are the absolute owner and jointly purchased the property situated at No.3314/1, 13^th main road, 7^th cross, HAL 2^nd Stage Indiranagar, Bangalore from its earlier owner one Sri Srikanth Ramawamy under a registered sale deed dated 22.01.2010. Afterwards they got the khatha of the said property changed to their names.  They also purchased property bearing No.3314 of the above address to an extent of 400 sq. ft out of 1,200 sq. ft being the 1/3^rd share of one Sridhar Ramaswamy on 24.05.2010. 

4.     The remaining 800 sq. ft of the property in Property NO.3314 belongs to the wife and son of Sridhar Ramaswamy. Property No.3314/1 is situated in the 1^st floor of the property No.3314. Complainants are the owners of the entire 1^st floor portion and owners of 1/3^rd on the ground floor.  The remaining 800 sq. ft of the property in the ground floor was gifted by one Sridhar Ramaswamy the earlier owner and vendor of the complainants to his wife Smt. C Jayanthi and his son Varun Sai Sridhar who are OP-3 and 4 in this case, who got impleaded afterwards.

5.     It is contended that they are the owners of property No.3314/1 having purchased the same from their earlier owner in the year 2010. This is in the first floor whereas property No.3314 is in the ground floor. The first floor has separate water connection through meter No.RRE 228876/28-324. After the purchase of the property, they are paying water bill every month through ECS as they are the absolute owners of the said property. During December 2018, OP issued a bill in respect of the said water meter wherein the name of the OP.3 and 4 namely Jayanthi C and Varun Sai has been including by deleting their names. When the same was questioned and requested to rectify the discrepancies by making representation on 18.12.2018 by producing the relevant documents to OP.1 and 2 did not carry out the change and entered their names, They had to file and application under RTI Act to obtain the details and also they have obtained said details and further OP-1 and 2 informed that they are not going to change any changes though the documents were provided.

6.     The water connection is in respect of property No.3314/1 which is in the 1^st floor and not to the property No.3314.  OP-1 and 2 have committed deficiency in service in removing their names and adding the name of OP-3 and 4 without bringing to their notice and taking their consent, which is illegal. Hence they had to issue a legal notice calling OP-3 and 4 to take necessary steps to enter their names. Inspite of it, OP-1 and 2 did not carryout their name s in respect of the said water meters and hence there is deficiency in service on the part of OP-1 and 2 and prayed to allow the complaint. 

7.     Upon the service of notice, OP-1 and 2 represented by its advocate filed their version contending that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts  and this complaint cannot be decided by this commission as it has no jurisdiction in view of the appeal provision u/s 12 of BWSSB Act 1964 as when they have refused to include the name of the complainant by giving an endorsement on 12.04.2019, they have to file an appeal against the endorsement given by the OP.1. Instead of filing the appeal the complainants have filed this complaint which cannot be decided and liable to be dismissed.

8.     The complaint is not maintainable on the ground that the owners of property No.3314 has not been made as parties to the proceedings and filed this complaint unnecessarily against them. The property is an individual house property and the complainants have alleged that they have purchase 1^st floor bearing No.3314/1. There is title suit pending between complainants and OP-3 and 4 in O.S.No.1390/2010 and OS.No.3779/2010 which is still pending. Complainants instead of agitating their right have filed this frivolous complaint against OPs.  When the matter in respect of title is pending before the Civil Court which has to determine the right of parties. OP.1 and 2 are bound by said decisions.  OP-3 and 4 of the joint owner of property No.3314 having right, interest over the same. 

9.     They have to provide water and sewage facility to property No.3314. In view of furnishing of joint khtha of the above OP.1 and 2 jointly issued the bill in respect of RR No.E228876/28-24 and there is no illegality or irregularity. They have denied that the complainants are the consumers and that they have denied to redress their grievances. There is no deficiency in this case. The complainants have foisted a false case  and is liable to pay exemplary cost and prayed the commission to dismiss the same.

10.   OP-3 and 4 after getting themselves impleaded as such in this complaint, have filed their version contending that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. Further denied that the complainants are the owners of the property and the documents produced are false and fabricated.

11.   It is contended by them, that the schedule property belong to one Col. KS Ramaswamy. Later it was transferred to Smt. Dhanalakshmi from said Col. KS Ramaswamy.  They are the in-laws of OP-3 and grand parent of OP-4.  The said property was divided between their 2 chiledren by name Sridhar Ramaswamy who got property No.3314 and Srikanth Ramaswamy who got property No.3314/1 through a Will executed by one Smt.Dhanalakshmi who is the wife of Col. Ramaswamy on 20.10.2005.  After the death of Col. Ramaswamy the khatha of the electricity installation stood in the name of Smt. Dhanalakshmi.  Afterwards OP-3 and 4 names have been entered in respect of 3314 the said property No.3314 consists of Ground floor, Garage room. Above the garage, adjoining  properties 3314/1 and they are in its peaceful possession and enjoyment and got the kahtha to their names. The said Sridhar Ramaswamy gifted the property No.3314/1 to them vide registered document of Gift Deed.  It is contended that Smt. Dhanalakshmi after the death of her husband got the khatha of property No.3314/1 and water connection RR No.E22876 changed to her name. It is also stands in the name of Dhanalakshmi only and it is for the exclusive use of the property owners  3314 even after the division of the property.

12.   They have a dispute regarding ownership of property in OS No.1390/2010 pending before the Hon’ble City Civil court and they have been using the water through the said meter.  There are two title dispute suits pending between them and the complainants in OS No.1390/2010 and 3779/2010, and upstairs they are in exclusive possession of the property. The garage portion of the separate and upstairs is having separate meter. Since the property bearing No.3314/1 complainants have right their names have been reflected in the said documents. Complainants have no right/title towards the portion bearing property No.3314 which belongs to them and they are in the possession of the same and using the same by regularly paying the electricity bills to OP-1 and under these circumstances, prayed the commission to dismiss the same.

13.   In order to prove the case, both parties have filed affidavit evidence and produced documents. Arguments Heard. The following points arise for our consideration:-

1. Whether the complainants have proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

2. Whether the complainants are entitled to the relief prayed for in the complaint?

14.   Our answers to the above points are:-

POINT NO 1: IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

POINT NO 2 : PARTLY IN THE AFFIRMATIVE

                      For the following.

REASONS

POINT NO 1:

15.   Upon perusing the affidavit evidence, documentary evidence it becomes clear that complainants are the owner in possession of the property No.3314/1 who got it under a registered sale deed. The said sale deed is produced and marked, under which, they got the entire property transferred to their name by way of sale from his vendor and the corporation has changed khatha to their name.

16.   It is the specific case of the complainant that after their name was entered into in respect of the water meter No.RRE228876/28-324, all of a sudden the same was changed to OP-3 and 4 name.  Though they requested by making application to OP-1 and 2 to keep the meter in their name, OP-1 and 2 have given an endorsement under Ex-P8 that:

“¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ¤ÃgÀÄ ¸ÀgÀ§gÁdÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ M¼ÀZÀgÀAr ªÀÄAqÀ½

¸ÀASÉå:¨ÉAdªÀÄA/¸À.PÁ¤.C(zÀ¥ÀÆ)-2/PÀA.ªÀå/22/ 2019-20   ¢£ÁAPÀ:12.04.2019

UÉ,

ªÀÄĤgÁdÄ Dgï

#3314, 13£Éà ªÀÄÄRågÀ¸ÉÛ,

7£Éà CqÀØgÀ¸ÉÛ, ºÉZï.J.J¯ï

2£Éà ºÀAvÀ, EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀ

¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ -08

ªÀiÁ£ÀågÉÃ,

«µÀAiÀÄ: ªÀiÁ»w ºÀPÀÄÌ C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄ-2005gÀ CrAiÀÄ°è ªÀiÁ»w PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ

G¯ÉèÃR: vÀªÀÄä Dgï.n.L. CfðAiÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:21.03.2019.

ªÉÄð£À «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§AzsÀ¥ÀlÖAvÉ, ªÀiÁ»w ºÀPÀÄÌ C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄ-2005gÀ CrAiÀÄ°è PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀAvÉ, vÀªÀÄä G¥À«¨sÁUÀzÀ°è vÉUÉzÀÄPÉÆAqsÀ ¤tðAiÀÄUÀ¼ÉAzÀgÉ.

1. ¥Àæ¸ÀÄÛvÀ vÀªÀÄä CfðAiÀÄ C£ÀĸÁgÀ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥Àj²Ã°¹zÁUÀ Dgï.Dgï.£ÀA:E:228876 F MAzÉà Dgï.Dgï.¸ÀASÉåUÉ ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ §zÀ¯Á¬Ä¸À®Ä JgÀqÀÄ CfðUÀ¼ÀÄ §A¢zÀÄÝ, ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ £ÀA:3314 ºÁUÀÆ 3314/1, UÀ¼ÁVzÀÄÝ zÁR¯ÁwUÀ¼À°è ªÀåvÁå¸ÀªÀÅ PÀAqÀħA¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
2. ºÁUÀÆ ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä Cfð¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ ªÀiÁ°PÀgÀ°è MªÀÄävÀ«®è¢gÀĪÀÅzÀÄ PÀAqÀÄ §A¢gÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ, DzÀÄzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀzÀj ¤Ãj£À ¨É¯É ¥ÀnÖAiÀÄ°è F »A¢ EzÀÝ ªÀiÁ°PÀgÀ ºÉ¸ÀjJ §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
3. ¥Àæ¸ÀÄÛvÀ E§âgÀÆ ªÀiÁ°PÀgÀÄ MmÁÖV vÀªÀÄä C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀÆPÀÛ zÁR¯ÁwUÀ¼À£ÀÄß PÀbÉÃjUÉ MzÀV¹zÀÝ°è ªÀÄÄA¢£À PÀæªÀÄ PÉÊUÉƼÀî¯ÁUÀĪÀÅzÀÄ.
4. F ªÉÄð£À J¯Áè CA±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß UÀªÀÄ£ÀzÀ°èlÄÖUÉÆAqÀÄ ¸ÀÆPÀÛ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ ¹UÀĪÀ vÀ£ÀPÀ ¸ÀzÀj Dgï.Dgï.¸ÀASÉå AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà jÃwAiÀÄ ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀzÀAvÉ vÀqɬÄrAiÀÄĪÀ ¤zsÁðgÀPÉÌà §A¢gÀ¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.

¸À»/-

¸À.PÁ.¤.C(zÀ¥ÀÆ)-2

¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÁðºÀPÀ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ

¤ÃgÀÄ ¸ÀgÀ§gÁdÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ M¼ÀZÀgÀAr ªÀÄAqÀ½

                 zÀQët ¥ÀƪÀð 2£Éà G¥À«¨sÁUÀ, 6£ÉÃCqÀØgÀ¸ÉÛ,

                     10£Éà ªÀÄÄRågÀ¸ÉÛ, ºÉZï.J.J¯ï.2£Éà ºÀAvÀ,

          ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ-560 038.

17.   They have also issued Ex.P10 the notice addressed to OP-1 demanding and requesting OP–1 and 2 to mention their name and mention the property No.3314/1 in the said meter and delete the mention of property No.3314.  OP-3 and 4 have produced the copy of the bill raised by OP-1 and 2 marked as Ex-P7 which is also the bill raised by OP-1 and 2 wherein the names of OP-3 and 4 has been mentioned with house No.3314 in the demand register and also in the bill raised for the month of August, October and November 2018. Whereas Ex.P9 produced by the complainant which is also demand notice which is for the month November 2018, the complainants name finds a place, in the said demand register the property number is 3314/1.

18.   It is the contention of OP-3 and 4 that, they have challenged the title of the complainant in the civil court in OS.No.1390/2010 and OS.No.3013/2019. Whatever be the case between the parties, prima facie it appears that complainants have purchased the property No.3314/1 to which OP.No.1 and 2 had raised the demand in respect of water meter No.E228876111/28-324. Probably complainants and OP-3 and 4 made a request to include their name OP-1 and 2 have changed to the name of the earlier owner in the demand bill, which is not correct. We are of opinion that, the act of OP-1 and 2 in changing the name of the complainants and adding the name of OP-3 and 4 altogether illegal and uncalled for and amounts to unfair trade in view of the complainants having purchased the property under registered deed from its owner and having got changed the khatha to their name as per ExP5.  In view of this, we answer POINT NO.1 IN THE AFFIRMATIVE

POINT NO.2:

19.   In view of our answer Point No.1 in the affirmative, we direct OP-1 and 2 to add the name of the complainants to the water installation in respect of water meter bearing RR NO.E-228876/28-324. In case if the said property 3314/1 has no separate water connection, we direct OP-1 and 2 to provide the same after requesting and informing the complainants to do all the formalities and to continue the name of OP-3 and 4 in respect of the water connection provided to property No.3314 and affect changes as directed above.  This order is subject to the decision that may be rendered by Hon’ble Civil Court in respect of the title of the concerned parties. 

20.   In view of the peculiar circumstances of the case and as OP-1 and 2 did not consider the sale deed of the complainant and without issuing prior notice and hearing the request of the complainants removed their name from the khatha of the said water installation which is evident from the demand notice i.e. Ex.P5 which made the complainants to approach this Commission by engaging an advocate and also by spending their time, money and energy besides suffering mentally and physically. For which we directed OP-1 and 2 to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards damages and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainants. In view of this, we answer POINT NO.2 PARTLY IN THE AFFIRMATIVE and pass the following:-

ORDER

1. The complaint is partly allowed with cost.
2. OP No.1 & 2 i.e. BWSSB represented by the Assistant Executive Engineer/Secretary are hereby directed to add the name of the complainants to the water installation in respect of water meter bearing RR NO.E-228876/28-324. In case if the said property 3314/1 has no separate water connection he direct OP-1 and 2 to provide the same after requesting and informing the complainants to all the formalities and to continue the name of OP-3 and 4 in respect of the water connection provided to property No.3314 and affect changes as directed above.
3. Further OP-1 and 2 to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards damages and to pay Rs.5,000/- towards the litigation expenses to the complainants.
4. No order against OP-3 and 4 as there is no prayer against them.
5. OP-1 and 2 are hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and submit the compliance report to this Commission within 15 days thereafter.
6. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

Note: You are hereby directed to take back the extra copies of the Complaints/version, documents and records filed by you within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

(Dictated to the Stenographer over the computer, typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Commission on this day the 11^th day of February 2022)

MEMBER                        PRESIDENT

ANNEXURES

1. Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant/s by way of affidavit:

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

Ex P1: Copy of the absolute sale deed.

Ex P2: Copy of the Khatha certificate

Ex P3: Copy of the Khatha extract

Ex P4: Copy of the sale deed in respect of ground floor

Ex P5: Kahata Extract

Ex P6: Khatha Certificate.

Ex P7: Letter written by complainant to OP.

Ex P8: Copy of the reply given by OP

Ex P9: Copy of the water bill

Ex P10. Copy of the legal notice issued to OP.

Ex P11: Postal acknowledgement.

2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s by way of affidavit:

RW-1: Sri.Jagadish, Asst. Executive Engineer of OP-1 & 2.

RW-2: Sri Varun Sai.S for OP.4

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Opposite Party/s

Ex R1 & R2: Copy of the plaint in OS No. 1390/2020 and OS No.3779/2010.

Ex R3: Copy of the Khatha extract in respect of the property

Ex R4: Tax paid receipt.

Ex R5 & R6: Copy of the plaint in OS No. 1390/2020 and OS No.3013/2019.

Ex R7: Water Bills.

MEMBER                PRESIDENT

RAK*