STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KERALA FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/32/A/690/2022 null EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KERALA WATER AUTHORITY PRESENT ADDRESS - VYTHIRI WAYANAD ,KERALA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus MOHAMMAD KAMAL PRESENT ADDRESS - POTHANPADAM MEPPADI POST KOTTANADU KOTTAPADI VILLAGE VYTHIRI ,KERALA. .......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SRI.B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR , PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR. SRI.AJITH KUMAR.D , JUDICIAL MEMBER SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN.K.R , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

NEMO FOR THE RESPONDENT:

NEMO DATED: INVALID DATETIME

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL No. 690/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 21.01.2025 (Against the Order in C.C. 163/2018 of DCDRC, Wayanad)

PRESENT:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR : PRESIDENT SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER SRI. RADHAKRISHNAN K.R. : MEMBER APPELLANT:

The Executive Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, Kalpetta, Vythiri Taluk, Wayanad.

(By Adv. Issac Samuel)

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

Mohammed Kamal, S/o Ahammed, Pothanpadam, Meppadi Post, Kottanadu, Kottapadi Village, Vythiri Taluk, Wayanad.

(By Adv. P. Rajmohan)

JUDGMENT

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR : PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party in C.C. No. 163/2018 on the files of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Wayanad (for short “the District Commission”).

2. The complainant is running a hotel in the name and style ‘Arafa Hotel’ in Kainatty, using the water supply provided by the opposite party, having No. KPT 1465/N. The water was supplied to the complainant uninterruptedly till 12.10.2018.

However, on 12.10.2018, in the evening, the employees of the opposite party, without any prior notice or information to the complainant, disconnected the water supply to the hotel run by the complainant. In fact, there was water leakage from the water pipe laid through the nearby front main road and the complainant had informed the said aspect to the opposite party. The employees of the opposite party repaired the said water leakage. There was no leakage of water from the connection provided to the complainant. However, without any reason or prior notice, the opposite party disconnected the water connection. The complainant had to spend Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) for getting sufficient water to the hotel due to the disconnection of water by the opposite party. Since the water connection was disconnected, the complainant was put to irreparable loss and injury. In the above circumstances, the complainant filed the above complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

3. The opposite party filed version admitting that the hotel of the complainant had water connection provided by the opposite party. It was contended that the complainant is a chronic defaulter. The connection to the hotel of the complainant was a non-domestic connection. On inspection of the site on the side of the National Highway in front of the hotel, the maintenance persons observed that there was some leakage of water from the service pipe, which had to be rectified by the consumer himself through a licensed plumber with the permission of NH authorities. This matter was informed to the consumer directly from the office of the opposite party many times before disconnecting the water connection. That apart, due to this leakage of water, many complaints were received from the public and ward councilors. The consumer was also informed about the complaint directly. However, the consumer did not make any arrangement to do the repair work of his service line through a licensed plumber. The opposite party received a complaint from the National Highway authorities over phone on 11.10.2018 to rectify the leakage of water. In the said circumstances, on 12.10.2018, the water connection was disconnected.

4. As per Sec. 45 (1)(g) of the Kerala Water Supply and Sewerage Act,1986, the authorized person, deputed by the officer in charge, has powers to cut any water connection wit