This complaint is coming on for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri K.Venu Gopal, Advocate for the complainant and Sri P.Venugopal Rao, Advocate for the Opposite Parties and having stood over for consideration, the Forum made the following:-

            O R D E R   

G.APPALA NAIDU, MEMBER 

            This complaint is filed U/s-12 of C.P.Act seeking reliefs directing the OP’s to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation/ damages due to the death of Gorle Modayya alias Tatababu together with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the death till the date of realization and also award damages for the mental agony caused to the complainants, to award costs of the complainants together with such other relief or reliefs as Hon’ble Forum may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice on the following averments:-

        The 1^st complainant is the wife and the other complainants 2 to 4 are the children of the deceased i.e. Gorle Modayya alias Tatababu S/o late Ramulu who died in an electrical accident on 13.03.2013 at about 3.00 PM in his village and on that day the deceased was taking “Toddy Tap” from the tree when the high tension electrical wires were passing through the middle of the Toddy Tree leafs and when one of the said leafs cut and fallen on the high tension electrical wires, the said deceased got electrical shock accidentally through the Toddy leaf and died on the tree.

        Immediately after the said accident he was shifted to D.C.H.S, S.Kota of Vizianagaram District where the doctors declared that he was already dead due to electrocution. After the inquest and Post- Mortem, the body of the deceased was handed over to the complainants for funeral obsequies.  It is therefore alleged that the said accident was occurred due to the high tension electric wires passing through the middle of the tree which is due to the deficiency of service and dereliction of duties of the employees of the Electrical Department, who have neither properly noticed before hand nor removed the same.  It is also stated that the OP’s are the masters of the employees having joint and several liability towards the aforesaid accident.

        It is further stated that the deceased was aged about 55 years and he was hale and healthy before the accident.  He was the only earning member of the family being a Toddy Tapper by earning Rs.200/- per day and any amount of compensation cannot compensate in terms of money to the complainants due to the death of the deceased.  It is further stated that the deceased was a member of Toddy Co-operative societies in Srungavarapu Kota and their association was registered under the societies registration act and he was also covered under the insurance.  After the said accident the complainants submitted the necessary documents to the office working under the 4^th OP for claiming the insurance compensation but so far they have not received anything from the 4^th OP.

        After the accident the department people visited the house of complainants but not paid any ex-gratia to the family members though the 1^st complainant being the wife lost her husband in her oldage and other complainants being the children lost their father in the said accident.

        The cause of action arose on 13.03.2013 at chamalapalli village when the accident occurred and also subsequent dates and finally they got issued a registered lawyer’s notice in the month of September,2013 but there was no positive response from the OP’s.  Hence this complaint.

        Counter filed by the 3^rd respondent which was adopted by 1^st and 2^nd respondents denying the allegations made in the complaint except those which are specifically admitted therein and puts the complainants to strict proof of the same.  It is submitted that the complainant is not a consumer and the alleged dispute is not a consumer dispute within the meaning of the consumer act.  It is also submitted that as per the provisions of the electricity Act 2003 the complainant has not given notice of occurrence of the said accident to the Electrical Inspector, which is mandatory.

        It is further submitted that Non-departmental fatal accident might have occurred to the deceased on the fateful day which was not reported earlier but learnt at a latter stage.  However the respondent received phone call on 13.03.2013 at 3.00 PM from the local person of chamalapalli village that a person got electrocuted in their village where-upon immediately he rushed to the spot and on enquiry it was observed that one Gorle Modayya aged 55 years of chamalapalli village near the Pothubandialem met with a Non-departmental fatal accident while trying to extract Toddy from the tree, When he cut the leaf of the tree which fell between him and the line touched, as a result of which he was electrocuted even though the line is at a distance of 5 feet from the tree and in this connection a detailed report was submitted by the A.E, Operation to the A.D.E S.kota on 13.03.2013 pursuant to which the A.D.E inturn inspected the scene of occurrence and submitted a report to the D.E/S.E, Vizianagaram.  Further as can be seen from the report to the police there is no whisper about the negligence of the respondents nor any deficiency of service on their part.  As noticed from the inquest report also, there is no whisper about the negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the department and also there is no document to show the alleged relationship of complainants with the deceased.  Therefore in view of the above facts and circumstances the Department pleads that there is no negligence or dereliction of duties on their part or its staff.  As there are no merits or bonafides in the claim of complainants and there is no cause of action to claim any compensation against the OP’s, they submit that the complaint is liable to be dismissed with costs in the interest of justice.

        Exhibits A1 to A5 are marked on behalf of the complainants but no exhibits are marked on behalf of the Opposite Parties.

        Exhibit A1 is the copy of F.I.R.  Exhibit A2 is the copy of Post Mortem Certificate.  Exhibit A3 is the Death Certificate.  Exhibit A4 is the family member certificate.  Exhibit A5 is the copy of the notice of complainant’s Advocate issued to the Opposite Parties.

        Heard the arguments.  Posted for orders.  The orders are as follows:-

        The counsel for both the parties advanced arguments vehemently by reiterating what they have stated in the complaint, counter, evidence affidavits and brief written arguments respectively.

        From the material available on record the main contention of the complainants is that the deceased died due to electrical shock accidentally through the Toddy leaf while he was taking Toddy Tap from the tree when high tension electrical wires were passing  through the middle of the Toddy Tree leafs and one leaf was cut and fallen on the high tension live electrical wires.

        In the counter filed by the OP’s it was stated that Non-departmental fatal accident might have occurred to the deceased on the unfortunate day which was not reported earlier but learnt at a later stage besides the fact that the complainants have not given any notice of occurrence of the accident to the Electrical Inspector, which is mandatory as per the provisions of the electricity Act 2003.  It is further reported by the OP’s that the accident might have occurred while the deceased was trying to extract Taddy from the tree, when he cut the leaf of the tree which fell between him and the lines touching the same, as a result of which the deceased was electrocuted even though the lines are at a distance of 5 feet from the tree, as stated and reported by the concerned engineers of the Department after inspection of the scene of occurrence.

        It is also evident from the report given to the police on 13.03.2013 by the son of the deceased that the deceased died while extracting Taddy from the tree (as per their profession) as a sequel to which the accident occurred due to electrical shock since one leaf was cut and fallen on lines.  Even as noticed from the Inquest Report also, there is no whisper about the negligence or deficiency of service on the part of the Department.  Further no documentary evidence was submitted by the complainants to prove that the accident occurred due to the negligence or dereliction of duties or deficiency of service on the part of the Department. But the unfortunate incident occurred being a Non-departmental accident while the deceased was extracting Taddy as per his profession from the tree though the electrical lines are at a distance of 5 feet from the tree.

From all the above facts, information, details and discussions, it is established that there is no negligence or dereliction of duty or deficiency of service on the part of OP’s since the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the deceased only.

In the light of all the above we are of the considered opinion that the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

In the result the complaint is dismissed, but under the circumstances without costs.

Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected by me and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 14th day of March, 2014.

Member                                                                 President

C.C.No.62/2013

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For complainant:-                                   For opposite parties:-

        PW 1.                                                      RW 1.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For complainant:-

Ex.A-1 is the  Copy of F.I.R.

Ex.A-2 is the copy of Post Mortem Certificate.

Ex.A-3 is the copy of Death Certificate.

Ex.A-4 is the copy of Family member certificate

Ex.A-5 is the copy of Rigistered lawyer notice.

For O.P:  – Nil -

                                                                              President