Judgment:
S.C. Jain, Member:
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 17.5.2012 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressalforum-VII, ShekhSarai, New Delhi in complaint case No.254/2010 titled Smt. UmaRaniVs. Executive Engineer (South-West-II), Delhi JalBoard.
2. Facts of the case are that the respondent/complainant is a registered consumer of the appellant having water connection No.2058 installed at her house bearing No.157, Village Post Office Dhansa, NewDelhi. The respondent/complainant alleged in her complaint filed before the Distt. Forum that the Lineman of the appellant/OP removed the cap and joined the two lines from the bore well No.8 located near her house which is situated at a greater height than the road passing near her house. It has been further stated by the respondent/complainant that the supplied water was blocked by putting the cap from flowing downward with the help of the said cap and when the line man started removing that cap she objected for the same because that will stop supply of water to her premises but it was agreed that a NRV (Non-return Valve) shall be installed to serve the purpose but it was installed after one month, and during this period she could not get the water. The complainant further stated that there were many unauthorised water connections before her house which were a hindrance for the free flow of supply uptoher house but no action was taken by the appellant/OP on her complaint to disconnect the unauthorised connections and her son Mr. Keshavapproached the appellant/OP many a times in person as well as also wrote many letters and sent E-mails to the OP to solve her problem.
3. She got her regular supply of water but having failed to get any relief to her grievance put forth before the appellant/OP the complainant filed the complaint before the Distt. Forum praying therein for directions to the OP to ensure regular sufficient water supply to her house and pay her the compensation of a sum of Rs.5000/- for mental agony and harassment and to pay her cost of litigation also.
4. On receiving the notice of the District Forum the appellant/OP appeared before the Distt. Forum and contested their case and submitted that they had inter connected two water supply lines near the residence of complainant/respondent to improve water supply in the area and installed a non-return valve so that the water can reach to her residence because the residence of the complainant/respondent is situated at a higher place (about eight feet above the road level) and was on a sloppy area and further submitted they had disconnected many unauthorised connections when they were reported to them and took all measures to improve the water supply and to satisfy the complainant/respondent.
5. Appellant further stated that sometimes the residents of the village operates the non-return valve unauthorisedlydue to which it may be possible that water might not be reaching uptothe house of the complainant/resident.
6. The OP/appellant stated in its reply filed before the Distt. Forum that DhansaVillage is on the command area of UjwaUGR (under groundreservoir/BPS for filter water supply and the filter water is supplied on alternative days as per schedule from 9.00 am to 1.00 p.m. and the tube well water supply is provided daily for about eight hours and whenever there is no supply of the tube well water and filter waters the water is supplied through water tankers to the residents of the area and all necessary measures are taken to improve the water supply to the consumers.
7. Distt. Forum after hearing arguments of both the parties came to the conclusion that the grievances as stated by the complainant in her complaint are fully supported by host of communications addressed by her son to various officers of the OP and other authorities set up by the Govt. to look into the problems of the citizens of Delhi and failure on the part of the appellant/OP to redress the genuine grievance of the complainant tantamount to deficiency in service as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and ordered the OP to ensure regular water supply to the complainant and also to pay her Rs.5000/- as compensation for her sufferance and mental agony with Rs.1000/- as cost of litigation.
8. Aggrieved by the order of District Forum the appellant filed this present appeal before this Commission. Regd. AD noticewas sent to the respondent who appeared and filed its reply to the appeal and contested their case. Both the parties led their arguments.
9. The appeal was filed mainly on the ground that District forum has passed the order with prejudicial mind, which is illegal and erroneous, perverse and without application of mind because the only grievance of the complainant was that she is not getting regular water supply through pipeline due to the two lines joined by the Delhi JalBoard and he could not get the supply for one month due to late installation of Non-return Valve after removal of the cap, whereas Delhi JalBoard has contended in the written statement filed before the Distt. Forum as well as in its affidavit filed by way of evidence before the Distt.Forum that the two lines had been joined near the complainants house to provide the filter water supply and to improve the water supply in the area but the Distt.Forum while passing the order had admitted only the contentions of the respondent/complainant as gospel truth without having any iota of any truth in it and the District Forum is merely considering the number of letters written by the son of the complainant or E-mails sent by him to the appellant and the submissions made by the appellant/OP were not considered in its true letter and spirit by the District Forum.
10. The appellant/OP further stated that the District Forum failed to take into consideration the fact that the appellant had installed the Non-return Valve near the complainants/respondents house due to sloppy area and house of the respondent is situated about 8-10 feet above the main Dhansaroad due to which the water is available at low pressure and the District Forum should have taken note of this fact and if at all the respondent/complainant had faced certain problems that was due to sloppy area and the situation of the house which is above 8-10 feet above the main road, but even then they had taken sufficient steps to ensure that the respondent gets regular supply of water as per schedule. The appellant further contended that at the time of sanctioning of water connection of the complainant/respondent only tube well water supply was available in the village and even at present also tube well supply is available at complainants house which he has never denied.
11. During the course of proceedings, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case when the respondent stated that the water never reaches to their pipeline uptotheir residence, the concerned executive engineer, Delhi JalBoard of the area was directed to be present and when he appeared he stated that they will inspect the premises of the respondent and the area to sort out the problem of the respondent and on 9.5.2014 they filed an inspection report conducted by ZonalEngineer-I (SW) alongwithShriKuldeepSingh JE (C) with four numbers of Baildarsand during and in the inspection report following observations were made:-
1. During site inspection it found that the tube well water supply is available nearby the house of complain, Smt. UmarRaniat about 11.45 AM. (Photograph attached).
2. The water connection of the complaint found disconnected. (Photograph attached) and the complaint is taking water supply from the neighbourhood house where filter water supply is available (photograph of neighbourhood water connection attached).
3. One side of the street tube-well supply and on other side of street filter water supply through UjwaUGR available. The House of the complaint is situated at the higher elevation. The timing of the filter water supply at present is from 8:00PM to 12:00PM (Duration of supply depends on availability of water in UGR). At present the timing of tube well supply in the morning is from 6.00AM to 12.00PM and in the evening from 3.00 PM to 9.00 PM.
12. The inspection conducted by the officials of the appellant shows that tube well water supply is available nearby house of the complainant and the water connection of the complainant found disconnected and the complainant / respondent was found taking water from the neighbourhood house where filter supply is available and the inspecting team also found that on one side of street, tube well supply is regular and on the other side of the street filter water supply through UjwaUGR available and filter water supply is available from 8:00 PM to 12:00 Noon depending upon the availability of water in UGR and presently the tube well water supply in the morning from 6:00 AM to 12:00 PM and in the evening from 3:00 PM to 9:00 PM, but the respondent filed her affidavit along with affidavit of Sh. GajrajSingh, who is the resident of house no. 161, NareshKumar who is the resident of house no. 156 and Sh. Hem Chanderwho is residence of house no 61 and Sh. Jai Singh who is resident of house no. 41 all residents of village Dhansa, New Delhi and stated in their affidavits that the water pipe lines were installed by Delhi JalBoard in our colony since long but there is no water supply in the said pipe line.
13. The appellant filed photographs of neighbourhood of the complainant where some residents are clearly visible taking water from the water line. To this the son of the complainant/ respondent who is the authorised representative submitted that the water coming out of the pipe as shown in the photograph is due to the water motor installed, which fact was found to be true while seeing the photograph.
14. Keeping in view the submissions made by both the parties and on the basis of documents and the inspection report filed by the officials of the appellant, it is clear that the water is available through the pipe line laid down by the appellant but it may also be true that the water might not be reaching up to the house of the respondent/ complainant due to drawing of water through illegal means like installing water motor and un-authorised water connections. But even if the house of the complainant is higher than the road level it becomes the duty of the appellant to ensure that the water supply reaches up to the house of the complainant. We accordingly partly allow the appeal and modify the order passed by the District Forum and orders the Appallent/OP(i) to reconnect the water connection of the complainant which they found to be disconnected within 7 days after completion of the formalities by the complainant as well as after depositing the requisite reconnection charges.
(ii) It is further ordered that the appellant shall ensure that after reconnection the complainant/ respondent get supply of the water during the specified times as specified by the appellant or as specified from time to time and shall also install the requisite equipments so that supply is not disturbed for the reason that the house is on a height above the road level.
15. If appellant/OP fails to comply with the above orders the respondent/complainant shall be at liberty to approach the District Consumer Forum concerned under Section 25/27 of Consumer Protection Act.
16. Let a copy of the judgement be provided to the parties free of cost as per rules and a copy of the judgement be also sent to the District Forum concerned and file be consigned to record room.
The original case fileof the Distt. Forum bereturned back to the concerned Distt. Forum.
17. FDR if any deposited by the appellant bereleased as per rules.