AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THE complainant was served with a notice by the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs. 5,132/- on the ground that he was supplying water from his motor and pumpset for constructing of a building for rice mill. Hence, he filed the said complaint. THE opposite parties alleged that the complainant had installed 1 H.P. electric motor and pumpset and that he was supplying water from his well with the motor and pumpset for the construction of the building of the rice mill for six months and thus has misused the electricity.
THE lower Forum rejected the contentions of the opposite parties and directed the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs. 2,750/- to the complainant with interest @ 18% p.a. Hence the appeal. A Commissioner was appointed in this case and the Commissioner has filed his report with a plan. He has noticed that there was only a 1/2 H.P. motor installed in the well of the complainant''s house. He has also noted that the level of water in the well is very low and a new borewell has been sunk in the southern side of the petitioner''s house and that a Panchayat water tap connection has also been provided nearby. Therefore, the report of the Commissioner disproves the contentions of the opposite parties on all grounds namely on the capacity of the motor and on the availability of water in the well. The Commissioner has also noted that there is a street running in between the rice mill and the complainant''s house. Neither the Commissioner has noted nor the opposite parties have pointed out any pipe or facility to show that the water from the well was being pumped out to the rice mill situated on the other side of the road namely about 20 ft. away. On the other hand, we find that the rice mill owner has his house to the east of the complainant''s house and he has got a compressor there. Thus, we find that there is nothing to show that the water has been supplied by the opposite party. If really, it is true, there is no reason given as to why no notice was given by the inspecting staff before ever they issued the bill claiming the sum of Rs. 5,132/-. There is nothing to show that there has been a misuse of tariff or that there is an illegal supply of water by the complainant from his well. Therefore, in such circumstances, the lower Forum was justified in accepting the case of the complainant that there was deficiency in service. However, the Lower Forum has granted a sum of Rs. 2,750/-. It has fixed the compensation towards mental agony at Rs. 1,000/-, cost at Rs. 750/- and compensation towards expenses and legal notices and physical strain at Rs. 1,000/-. We are unable to agree with the quantification of the claim by the lower Forum. While already a sum of Rs. 750/- has been awarded towards cost, it is not known on what ground, expenses for legal notices is allowed. It is also not shown how any physical strain is involved and where is the provision for measuring the physical strain or awarding compensation on that ground. Therefore, in such circumstances, we are of the view that the complainant is if at all entitled to only a sum of Rs. 1,000/- in all. The lower Forum has also erred in granting interest on the said sum @ 18% p.a. which also should be set aside.
In the result, this appeal is allowed in part modifying the order of the lower Forum. The opposite parties/appellants are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,000/- in all to the complainant. In the circumstances, the parties shall bear their own cost here and before the lower Forum. Time for compliance: Two months. Appeal partly allowed.