Man challenges Rs 79,808 water bill, wins new meter, Rs 28,000 award and bill set aside

6 min readUpdated: Jun 17, 2026 01:55 PM IST

The complainant used to take a very small quantity of water from the Kerala Water Authority (KWA) water line as he has a well.

(Ai-generated image)

Setting aside an exorbitant water bill of Rs 79,808 raised against a man, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram, directed the Kerala Water Authority to replace his defective water meter and pay him Rs 28,000 as compensation and litigation costs.

President P V Jayarajan and the members Preetha G Nair and Viju V R directed the Kerala Water Authority to comply with the order within one month, failing which the amount, excluding litigation costs, would carry interest at 8 per cent per annum from the date of default.

“So in the absence of evidence from the part of opposite parties 1 (assistant executive engineer) and 2 (executive engineer), we cannot say that the water leakage has happened after the meter point. Hence, the opposite parties 1 and 2 have failed to prove that the meter of the complainant was working in good condition. The issuance of an exorbitant water bill to the complainant without any cogent reason amounts to deficiency in service,” the commission said on June 8.

Rs 79,808 water bill

The complainant had a water connection with a consumer number.

The complainant used to take a very small quantity of water from the Kerala Water Authority (KWA) water line as he has 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 the water meter with a new one, but no action was taken by KWA.

On June 12, 2015, an overseer informed the complainant that there was 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 water meter.

After that, the opposite parties issued a bill in which it was seen that Rs 79,808 was due to the KWA with disconnection date given as October 28, 2015.

The complainant alleged that this is due to a faulty meter, but the opposite parties did not take any action to replace the water meter.

The complainant contended that the act of the opposite parties amounted to deficiency in service.

Properly working water meter

The opposite parties contended that during March 2015 and May 2015 the water meter showed not clear status due to the presence of water vapour inside the water meter.

It was submitted that the water 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 normal and the consumption was only below 1KL and 4KL, respectively.

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

Water 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.

Story continues below this ad

The commission said that the opposite parties did not produce any documentary evidence to substantiate their pleadings that the meter was not faulty, and also they have not adduced any evidence to prove that the leakage has 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

Story continues below this ad

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.

Consumer helpline number of respective state and national consumer commission: 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.

Somya Panwar works with the Legal Desk at The Indian Express, where she covers the various High Courts across the country and the Supreme Court of India. Her writing is driven by a deep interest in how law influences society, particularly in areas of gender, feminism, and women’s rights.

She is especially drawn to stories that examine questions of equality, autonomy, and social justice through the lens of the courts. Her work aims to make complex legal developments accessible, contextual, and relevant to everyday readers, with a focus on explaining what court decisions mean beyond legal jargon and how they shape public life.

Alongside reporting, she manages the social media presence for Indian Express Legal, where she designs and curates posts using her understanding of digital trends, audience behaviour, and visual communication. Combining legal insight with strategic content design, she works on building engagement and expanding the desk’s digital reach.

Somya holds a B.A. LL.B and a Master’s degree in Journalism. Before moving fully into media, she gained experience in litigation and briefly worked in corporate, giving her reporting a strong foundation. ... Read More

Tags:

compensation

Kerala

water bill