Vali Mohammad - Appellant
Versus
Shriman A. wadh Bihari & Ors. - Respondent
Decided On : 01/02/1993
Appeal No. 203 of 1992
Advocates Appeared :
Shri Mohan Chokse
Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 15 - Appeal - Complaint against disconnection of water connection for non-payment - Arrears - Rules permitting disconnection for non-payment without notice - Disconnected accordingly - District Forum holding such a disconnection was not a deficiency in service whether correct? (Yes) (Para 2) (See M.P. Municipalities Water Tax Levy, Collection & Refund Rules 1989 - Rule 12)
Result: Appeal dismissed.
IMPORTANT POINT
Disconnection of water connection for nonpayment of water charges, without notice, is not a deficiency in service in view of Rule 12 of M.P. Municipalities Water Tax Levy, Collection and Refund Rules, 1989.
Shri V.S. Kokje, President.- This is an appeal by the complainant whose complaint has been dismissed by District Forum, Shahdol. The complainant contended that his water connection was disconnected by the Respondents without any prior notice on 1.5.3.1992, when by public notice published in the local newspapers of 12th March, 1992, the consumers were given time upto 16th March; 1992 for deposit of arrears. On account of disconnection of the water supply, the complainant has claimed Rs. 15,000/- for mental agony, Rs. 10,000/- for loss of prestige and defamation and Rs. 1,000/- as the costs.
2. The District Forum after considering the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the water supply was disconnected on 11th March, 1992 and not on 15th March, 1992 as alleged by the complainant and on that date the complainant wall in arrears having not deposited the amount of water charges for the period from November 1990 to October 1991. The non-applicants/respondents had also pointed out that under Rule 12 of M.P. Municipalities Water Tax Levy. Collection and Refund Rules, 1989 they had a right to disconnect the water supply for non-payment of arrears without any notice. On perusal of the record of the case we find that the District Court(Forum) has correctly appreciated evidence on record and has reached a valid conclusion that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the Respondents. The complaint has therefore been rightly dismissed and this appeal which has no force is accordingly dismissed. There shall however be no order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.