Karnataka

Kolar

CC/20/2014

Sri. Venkateshappa, - Complainant(s)

Versus

BESCOM,& Ors. - Opp.Party(s)

M.Srinivas

07 Feb 2015

ORDER

  Date of  Filing : 08.05.2014

  Date of Order :  07.02.2015

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR

 

Dated 07^th  FEBRUARY 2015

 

PRESENT

 

Sri. SYED ANSER KALEEM           …….      PRESIDENT

Sri. H.JANARDHAN                         ……..     MEMBER

 

CC No. 20 / 2014

 

Sri. Venkateshappa,

S/o. Yerrappa,

Aged about 72 years,

Residing at Janugutte Village,

Kamasamudram Hobli,

Bangarpet Taluk.

 

(By Sri M. Srinivas, Adv.)                                       ……. Complainant

 

V/s.

 

 

1. The Chief Engineer,

Bangalore Rural,

BESCOM,

No.14/3, 4^th Floor,

Nrupthunga Road,

Bangalore – 560 001.

 

2. The Executive Engineer (Ellect.)

BESCOM,

K.G.F Division, K.G.F,

Bangarpet Taluk.

 

3. The Asst. Executive Engineer,

BESCOM,

Bangarpet Sub-Division,

Bangarpet.

 

(By Smt Kusuma Krishnamurthy Adv.)        …… Opposite Parties

 

 

ORDER

 

By Sri. SYED ANSER KALEEM,  PRESIDENT

 

This Complaint has filed by the Complainant against the OPs U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 praying to pass an order directing the OP to pay a sum of Rs.19,50,000/- with interest, costs and other reliefs. 

 

2.       The brief facts of the Complaint is that, the complainant is the absolute owner of the residential house situated at Janugutte Village, Kamasamudram Hobli, Bangarpet Taluk., and the said house was built in a Mangalore Tile Roofed house constructed by the complainant about 20 years back by investing Rs.3,50,000/-.   The complainant’s son by name Sri. J.V. Venkataswamy is working as a Government School Teacher at Arunodaya Tanda, Gangavathi and later on he got transferred to Government School, Badaguttala Halli, Kamasamudra Hobli, Bangarpet.    The complainant further stated that due to transfer of his son, he had shifted all his house hold articles like TV, fridge, sofa set, school certificates, service records, LIC & PF bonds, cash, gold ornaments, silver ornaments, house hold articles, etc., to his house.     The complainant and his son were raised loan of Rs.1,70,000/- from Punjab National Bank, Thoppanahalli for construction of new house and that amount was also kept in the said house.  On 26.03.2012 at about 2.25 p.m. due to gross negligence on the part of the OPs in F-2 feeder at Kamasamudra Village, due to fault in breaker earth, there is short circuit in the complainant village impacting all TV sets, fridge and other electrical articles were destroyed and also fire accident occurred in the complainant house resulting in damages to two TVs, fridge, washing machine, radio, DVD player, sofa set, two cots, grinder, almara, ragi of 10 bags, rice of 03 bags, silk saries, gold ornaments including two pare chain, rings, eyear stoods, neck chain, in all 68 grams gold articles,  roof of the house, 750 tiles, ceiling fans, table fan, mini Ups, in all worth about Rs.6,86,000/-, cash of Rs.2,20,000/-, LIC bond worth Rs.3,00,000/-, KGID Bond of Rs.1,50,000/-, books, school marks cards., totally sustained loss a of Rs.21,48,000/- and the complainant house became unfit for human dwelling and thereby the complainant is now taking shelter in a rented house and paying rent of Rs.3,000/- per month.      The Ops have admitted that the said incident occurred due to their negligence in transmitting electricity and assured to pay compensation as claimed by the complainant, but for the reasons best known to them, they have failed to pay the said compensation amount.     The complainant finally got issued notice to the Ops to pay the total loss suffered by him, but the Ops in their notice replied, that they are willing to pay a compensation of Rs.25,000/-  only to the complainant.     Then complainant in order to file complaint before this Forum, he has restricted his claim to Rs.19,50,000/- out of Rs.21,48,000/- and hence this Complaint. 

 

3.       Upon service of notice on OPs and the OPs have appeared before this Forum and filed their version.   In its version OPs contended that, they are not aware of complainant’s son by name Sri. J.V. Venkataswamy is working in Arunodaya Tanda, Gangavathi Taluk and later on he got transferred to Kamasamudra Hobli, Bangarpet and shifted all his house hold articles like TV, fridge, sofaset, school certificates, service records, silk sarees, gold, LIC & PF bonds, silver ornaments, etc., and they have raised loan of Rs.1,70,000/- from Punjab National Bank, Thoppanahalli for the construction of new house and the said amount was also kept in the house.   Further Ops admitted that, the complainant has taken power connection about 13 years back bearing RR. BJL. No.572.    The Ops denied that, on 26.03.2012 at about 2.25 p.m. due to negligence on the part of Ops F-2 feeder at Kamasamudram Village and due to fault in breaker earth, there is short circuit in the complainant’s village.    The Ops further submits that, the complainant has taken Bhagya Jyothi lightening to his house and as per the Government Scheme the consumer has to utilize only one Blub of 40 watts and the consumer charges are paid by the Government, but complainant has violated the norms regarding using the said scheme.     The Ops further submitted that on humanitarian grounds only they are ready to pay Rs.25,000/- to the complainant.     Hence, OPs pray to dismiss the Complaint.

 

4.       To substantiate the case of the respective parties, complainant and OPs filed their evidence and also we have heard the arguments. On the basis of the pleadings and evidence on record, following points will arisen for our consideration.

 

(i)      Whether the Complainant proves deficiency in service on the part of the OPs?

 

(ii)     Whether the Complainant is entitled for the relief?

 

(iii)    What Order ?

 

5.       Our findings to the above points are:

 

(i)      In the Negative

 

(ii)     In the Negative

 

(iii)    As per final order

 

REASONS

 

6.       Point Nos. (i) & (ii) – On perusing the pleadings and evidence placed before us, it is an undisputed fact that the complainant has obtained electricity connection under Bhagya Jyothi Scheme.    It was not in dispute that due to electricity short circuit in F-2 feeder, the house of the complainant was burnt.    The crux of the matter is to consider whether the incident of burning house is due to negligent act of the OP?  Per-contra Ops submitted that the complainant obtained Bhagya Jyothi Scheme, according to which he is entitled only for one Blub of 40 watts and the consumer charges are paid by the Government, but complainant has violated the norms regarding using the said scheme.      Whereas, the complainant not whispered anything in his complaint that how many bulbs he has used in their house.    Also as per the scheme the   complainant has to utilize one Blub of 40 watts only.  If such being the case, how can he use fridge TVs, washing machine, radio, DVD player, grinder, etc.,  Obviously the complainant used all those things automatically heavy electricity will flow due to usage, the accident might have caused.   Hence, the Ops are rightly contended that the complainant violated the terms and conditions of the scheme.   Furthermore, the complainant not examined any expert in order to falsify the contention of the Ops.    More so, the complainant failed to produce any other independent witness regarding negligence on the part of the Ops and also the loss suffered by the complainant.  In absence of credible evidence and hence the contention of the complainant is lame of strength and holds no water.     However, the Ops submits that they are ready to pay upto Rs.25,000/- to the complainant on humanitarian ground and the complainant is at liberty to collect the said amount.    On perusing the report by the Inspector of Electricity Department from the Government of Karnataka, in its report come to conclusion that and states that as below:

 

“¸ÀzÀj UÁæªÀÄzÀ «zÀÄå¢Ã¥ÀPÀgÀtzÀ ¸À®ÄªÁV PÉ.f.J¥sï £À PÉÆgÀªÀÄAqÀ¯ï 66/11PÉ« «zÀÄåvï PÉÃAzÀæ¢AzÀ J¼ÉAiÀįÁVgÀĪÀ 11PÉ« J¥sï-2, «zÀÄåvï ªÀiÁUÀðzÀ PÀA§UÀ¼À°è n.«. r±ï PÉç¯ï C£ÀÄß ¸ÀºÀ §AUÁgÀ¥ÉÃmɬÄAzÀ ºÀwÛgÀzÀ UÁæªÀÄUÀ½UÉ J¼ÉAiÀįÁVzÀÄÝ, ¸ÀzÀj E£ÀÄì¯ÉÃmÉqï PÉç¯ï ªÉÊgï C£ÀÄß ªÉĸÉAdgï ªÉÊgï£À ªÀÄÆ®PÀ J¼ÉAiÀįÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.   AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà MAzÀÄ ¸ÀܼÀzÀ°è F ªÉĸÉAdgï ªÉÊgï ºÁUÀÆ E£ÀÄì¯ÉÃmÉqï PÉç¯ï ªÉÊgï 11PÉ« «zÀÄåvï ¸ÀA¥ÀPÀðPÉÌ §A¢zÀÄÝ ºÉaÑ£À «zÀÄåvï ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼À°è C¼ÀªÀr¸À¯ÁVgÀĪÀ n.«. ¸ÉÖ©¯ÉÊdgï, ¦æqïÓ ºÁUÀÆ EvÀgÉ «zÀÄågï G¥ÀPÀgÀtUÀ½UÉ ¥ÀæªÀ»¹, EªÀÅUÀ¼É®èªÀÇ ºÁ¤UÉƼÀUÁVªÉ EAzÀÄ C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄ¥ÀqÀ¯ÁVzÉ.”

  

The complainant did not say anything contrary to the above report.   Whoever desire any Court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability depend on the existence to facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts must exists.    Hence, the complainant did not discharge the burden of proving negligence on the part of the OP.     In the light of above discussions, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant is not proved the deficiency in service on the part of the OP.   Accordingly we hold that Points (i) & (ii) in the negative.

 

7.       Point No. (iii) –  In the result, we proceed to pass the following order:

 

ORDER

 

1.       Complaint is dismissed.   No order as to costs.

         

2.       Send free copy of this order to both the parties.

 

Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Forum on this, the 07^th February 2015.

 

 

 

 

             MEMBER                                PRESIDENT