Faulty water meter leads to Rs 79,808 bill, consumer wins Rs 28,000 relief

Rs 79,808 water bill

• The complainant had a water connection with a consumer number. 
• He allegedly used to take a very small quantity of water from the KWA water line, as he had a well. 
• The complainant got a demand notice in which the current reading on May 18, 2015, was noted as zero and the previous reading as NR (not read). 
• On May 19, 2015, the complainant gave a letter to the assistant executive engineer stating that the water meter is defective and requested permission to replace it with a new one, but the KWA took no action. 
• On June 12, 2015, an overseer informed the complainant that there was a leakage in his service pipe outside the compound. 
• The opposite parties, assistant executive engineer and executive engineer, issued a notice on June 16, 2025, to the complainant, directing him to rectify the above leakage with their consent and in their presence. 
• On July 13, 2015, the complainant rectified the minor leakage in the service line outside his compound. 
• The complainant informed the assistant executive engineer on various occasions that the water meter may be defective as there was no underground leakage in the pipeline after the meter. 
• After that, the opposite parties issued a bill in which it was seen that Rs 79,808 was due to the KWA with the disconnection date given as October 28, 2015. 
• The complainant alleged that this was due to a faulty meter, but the opposite parties did not take any action to replace it.
• The complainant contended that the act of the opposite parties amounted to a deficiency in service.

‘Water meter working properly’

The opposite parties contended that during March 2015 and May 2015, the water meter showed an unclear status due to the presence of water vapour inside it. 

It was submitted that the meter was working properly and so there was no need for replacement. 

The opposite parties submitted that the overseer and the meter inspector inspected the site and found that an underground leakage occurred due to the breakage of the service line after the meter point. 

It was submitted that the heavy consumption was due to the leakage, and the complainant was directed to rectify the leakage and that the next reading was taken on September 15, 2015, and November 9, 2015, and the reading was seen to be normal and the consumption was only below 1 kilolitre and 4 kilolitre, respectively. 

It was argued that as per the KWA order, the complainant was eligible for a leak benefit of Rs 28,380, and there was no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties, hence the complaint may be dismissed.

Leakage in service line

• The key question before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram, was whether there was any unfair trade practice or deficiency in service from the side of the opposite parties and whether the complainant was entitled to get the reliefs.
• The commission observed that the complainant had rectified the leakage in the presence of the officials of the opposite parties, but the leakage was in the service line outside his compound. 
• The commission said that the opposite parties did not produce any documentary evidence to substantiate their pleadings that the meter was not faulty, and they have also not adduced any evidence to prove that the leakage had happened in the service line after the water point. 
• In the view of the place material, it was observed that, in the absence of evidence from the part of the opposite parties, it could not be established that the water leakage had happened after the meter point; hence the opposite parties failed to prove that the meter of the complainant was working in good condition, and the issuance of exorbitant water bill to the complainant without any cogent reason amounts to deficiency in service. 
• The complaint was allowed, and the opposite parties were directed to replace the faulty water meter with a new one and also not to cut off the water supply of the complainant’s house, and to quash the exorbitant demand notice issued to the complainant.
• The commission also directed the opposite parties to pay Rs 25,000 to the complainant as compensation for the mental agony suffered by him and Rs 3000 as litigation cost t within one month from the date of this order, failing which the amount, except cost, carries interest at 8 per cent per annum from the date of default till realisation.

Consumer takeaway 

The ruling highlights that the authority cannot impose inflated utility bills on consumers due to deficiency in service on their part. In this case, the water meter was defective, and the authority failed to address the complainant’s issue despite him flagging the abnormal billing.

Consequently, the commission ordered the authority to replace the defective meter and pay compensation to the complainant.

For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Kerala helpline: 1800-425-1550) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.