Sri Nabakishore Badapanda filed a consumer case on 08 Aug 2001 against 1. The District Manager in the Kendujhar Consumer Court. The case no is 76/1999 and the judgment uploaded on 20 May 2016.
IN THE COURT OF THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KENDUJHAR
C.D CASE NO.76/99
Sri Nabakishore Badapanda,
S/o: Late Goura Chandra Badapanda,
Village: Badanai, P.S: Champua,
Dist: Keonjhar ……………………………………..Complainant
Vrs.
1. The District Manager,
Orissa Agro Industries Corporation Limited,
Keonjhar, At/P.O: Keonjhargarh,
P.S: Town, Dist: Keonjhar
2. The Executive Engineer, Keonjhar
Keonjhar Electrical Division,
At/Post: Keonjhargarh, Dist: Keonjhar
3. The Sub-Divisional Officer
Electrical Sub-Division, Champua,
At/Post/ P.S: Champua, Dist: Keonjhar
4. The District Agriculture Officer, Champua,
At/Post/P.S: Champua,
Dist: Keonjhar ……………………………………..Opp. Parties
Advocate for the Complainant: Sri Suresh Das, B.K. Behera & S.C. Sahoo
For the OP. No.1: Sri C. Hota & S.K. Paikray
For the OP. No.2&3: Set ex-parte
For the OP. No.4: Nemo
Present- Sri B. Mishra, President
And
Miss. P. Singh, Member
_________________________________________________________________________
Date of Hearing: 01.05.2001 Date of Order: 08.08.2001
Sri B. Mishra, President: - The brief facts of the case are that the complainant to earn his livelihood through agriculture has applied for a lift irrigation point at his village Badnai to irrigate 5 Acres of his land and became a member of Krushisahayaka Kendra in short (K.S.K) to the District Agriculture Officer, Champua (OP. No.4). The OP. No.4 sponsored this application in the year 1997 to OP. No.1. After verification the OP. No.1 suggested the complainant to have bore well on his land, so for the purpose the complainant on 17.6.97 deposited Rs.10,000/- and on 15.4.99 Rs.7000/- as advance and after deposit of the amount the OP. No.1 dug the bore well on 19.6.97 and intimated OP. No.2 to give the electric connection to the said bore well, as a Motor having a strength of 1.5 H.P was to be installed in that L.I. Point and accordingly OP. No.3 prepared the estimate, received the security deposit and service connection charges of Rs.1090/- on 6/11/1999.
That under the SPA Scheme of Govt. of Orissa in the financial year 1998 the private/ O.A.I.C point are eligible for subsidy of Rs.20,000/-. Being allured for the subsidy completed the work in time but the electric energy connection could not be met after 9 months of the completion of the work due to the negligence, in action and deficiency of service of the Opp. Parties so the complainant suffered a loss of income for the year 1997 to 1999 and also mentally & physically as he had to run to Champua and Keonjhar to approach Opp. Parties on several times. The complainant did not get a reply of the notice served through his lawyer from the Opp. Parties. Hence the complaint for a direction to the Opp. Parties to complete the scheme within a period to be stipulated by the court with all the benefits he was entitled in the year 1997 and from the OP. No.1 a sum of Rs.50,000/- for loss of income and Rs.30,000/- as mental agony and Rs.5, 000/- for physical hardship and Rs.1000/- towards litigation expenses and in the alternative if OP. No.1 does not complete the project he be directed to reply the sum of Rs.17.000/- with interest at the rate of 15% per annum with the other reliefs and also claims for a direction to the OP. No.2 & OP. No.3 to give compensation amount of Rs.30,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5, 000/- towards physical hardship and Rs.50,000/- towards loss of income and Rs.1000/- towards litigation expenses and the subsidy money of Rs.20,000/- or in alternative to refund a sum of Rs.1090/- with a interest of 15% per annum with other compensation amount as claimed above with other relief.
In support of the contention the complainant has filed some documents marked as Ext.1 to Ext.7. Ext.1 & 2 are the original receipts granted by the OP. No.1 for payment of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.7000/- to OP. No.1 by the complainant as an advance for bore well on 17/6/1997 and 15/4/1997 respectively. Ext.3 is a money receipt in original granted to the Complainant by GRIDCO S.D.O. Electrical, Champua for an amount of Rs.1090/- on 30.11.98 as permission for L.No.894 in consumer number column. Ext.4 is a Xerox copy of letter addressed to the Chief Engineer, Bhubaneswar by Executive Engineer, Keonjhar Electrical Division regarding granting of subsidy to Pvt. L.I. Point and O.A.I.C. Ext.5 and 5/1 are the lawyer’s notices and Ext.5/2 to 5/5 are the postal receipts sent to OP. No.1 to OP. No.4 respectively. Ext.6 is a letter for sanction of loan to the complainant by OP. No.4 to Branch Manager, B.G.B. Remuli Branch. Ext.7 is the copy of a letter of OP. No.4 to OP. No.1 sent to the complainant.
After due service of notice OP. No.2 & OP. No.3 remained absent and did not take any steps and are set ex-parte on 25/5/2000. The OP. No.1 has filed version on 13/12/2000 challenging that there is no cause of action against this Opp. Party and the petition is not maintainable. But admitted the deposit of Rs.17,000/- and completion of the bore well and states that after completion of the bore well, It had to wait for supply of L.I. Line as the complainant has applied and deposited the charges in O.S.E.B (GRIDCO) and this Opp. Party is not at fault and is not liable and further states that this Opp. Party has replied to the notice of the advocate that the subsidy disbursed on the very day the complainant deposited the advance amount and the complainant has to pay the balance amount to this Opp. Party so that this Opp. Party would complete the work after 3 days of deposit of the balance amount.
After service of notice the Opp. Party No.4 filed version on 20/4/2001 and states that the complainant applied to K.S.K. Champua for digging of a bore well the K.S.K. Champua accepting the proposal forwarded the original application along with land records feasibility report and trace map etc. to OP. No.1 and the complainant has also kept contact from time to time for progress of said project. And the KSK forwarded the required papers to the B.G.B. Remuli for sanction of the loan for the project and also states that the KSK has requested the GRIDCO Authority, Champua for energisation of the project and which is not yet done and sought for the guidance for this forum to the Opp. Parties for completion of the project along with energy supply to make the project viable.
The admitted facts are that the complainant has applied for L.I. Point under S.P.A. Govt. Scheme to irrigate his land and became a member of K.S.K. of Champua and the District Agriculture Officer (OP. No.4) has sponsored his application to the concerned authority and after completion of all the formalities the OP. No.1 dug the bore well in the land of the complainant and for lifting of water a motor of 1.5 H.P is required and the electric energy supply has not been provided to the complainant though he has deposited the required charges for the purpose and the K.S.K. Champua has requested the GRIDCO Authority, Champua to take suitable steps for energisation of the project. The energisation work is not done and the applied electric energy is not supplied to the complainant.
The point for consideration is, if there is deficiency of service of non-supply of electric energy to the applied place of the complainant and if so who is responsible for it and liable for the same.
On the date of hearing neither parties nor their counsels are present, and made their submission. So on perusal of records it is found that the attention of OP. No.2 & OP. No.3 has been drawn through Ext.5/1 regarding the non-supply of power to the motor of the L.I. Point of the complainant, in spite of deposit of the amount for service connection and security deposit by the complainant (Ext.3). It seems that due to lack of cordiality of the respective departments the complainant is deprived of his legitimate right of power supply. In the present case though the Executive Engineer and the S.D.O of the connected electric department made parties and noticed to make their submission did not choose to represent and clarify the actual position and also in view of the written version filed by OP. No.1 & OP. No.4 that the project of the complainant is not completed due to non- supply of electric energy to the L.I. Point of the complainant has inspired us to believe and there is sufficient reasons to come to a conclusion that they have deliberately remained absent as they have no reasonable explanation to offer for their negligence/ deliberate inaction to harass the complainant to supply the electric energy in spite of deposit of required charges which has caused and causing financial loss to the complainant as he is not yet able to enjoy the benefit of the scheme. In other ward the OP. No.2 & OP. No.3 are deficient in their service and should compensate the complainant. When the complainant has deposited the amount of bore well and the electric energy charges since long and the non supply of electric energy is obviously would have caused some financial loss to him since then, which of course not possible to quantify but under the circumstances we feel that a sum of Rs.10,000/- will be reasonable for the financial loss from the year of installation and mental agony and costs of the litigation, which the OP. No.2 & OP. No.3 have to pay with equal proportion to the complainant.
In the result, the petition is allowed and the OP. No.2 & OP. No.3 are directed to supply the power (electric energy) to the applied place to the complainant without further demand of any amount and pay a consolidated amount of Rs.10000/- for financial loss and costs within 30 days from the date or receipt of this order. After the date the amount will carry interest 18% p.a. till final payment.
Orders pronounced in the open court today i.e. on 8th day of August, 2001 under my hand and seal of this forum.
Copies of this order be made available to the parties as per rules.
I agree
Miss P. Singh Sri B. Mishra
Member President
Dictated and Corrected by me.
Sri B. Mishra
President
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.