Haryana

Jind

CC/15/94

Bijender - Complainant(s)

Versus

DHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

Sh Mahabir Sheoran

28 Apr 2016

ORDER

BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JIND.

                                           Complaint No. 90 of 2015

   Date of Institution: 10.7.2015

   Date of final order: 28.4.2016

 

Bijender son of Basau Ram resident of village Kheri Mashania, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind.

 

                                                             ….Complainant.

                                       Versus

  1. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Vidut Nagar, Hissar through its M.D.
  2. Eexecutive Engineer, DHBVNL, Narwana.
  3. Sub Divisional Officer (OP) Sub Division, DHBVNL, Uchana.

 

…..Opposite parties.

                          Complaint under section 12 of

                          Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Before: Sh. Dina Nath Arora, President.

    Smt. Bimla Sheokand, Member.

            Sh. Mahinder Kumar Khurana, Member.   

 

Present:  Sh. Mahabir Sheoran Adv. for complainant.

              Sh. Pawanjit Saini Adv. for opposite parties.

                     

ORDER:

 

             The brief facts in the complaint are that complainant is an agriculturist having agriculture land comprised in Khewat No.86 Khatoni No.121 situated in the revenue estate of village Kheri Mashania, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind. The opposite parties have installed a transformer in his field and electric supply to his tube-well was provided. The complainant has sown 5½ acre of  wheat crops  in

                        Bijender Vs. DHBVNL etc.

                                   …2…    

his field.  It is stated that on 17.4.2015 at about 12.15 P.M. due to huge sparking in the transformer, the wheat crops standing in 2½ acres of land has totally been burnt and has suffered huge losses. The complainant made a complaint to the opposite parties as well as SDM, Narwana regarding burning of wheat crops. The Agriculture Officer, Narwana has inspected the spot of the field of the complainant and submitted his report that complainant had sown wheat crops in 5½  acres of land and out of which wheat crops in 2½ acres of land has totally been burnt due to sparking in transformer. Deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties is alleged. It is prayed that the complaint be accepted and opposite parties be directed to pay an amount of Rs.75,000/- for loss of wheat crops, a sum of Rs.15,000/- as compensation on account of mental pain and agony  as well as to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as litigation charges to the complainant.

2.     Upon notice, the opposite parties have appeared and filed the written statement stating in the preliminary objections i.e. the complaint is not maintainable in the present forum; the complainant has no cause of action and locus-standi to file the present complaint, the complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands and has suppressed the true and material facts and the complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious.  On merits, it is contended that the matter was investigated  on the spot through officers of opposite parties and statement of Sh. Sultan Singh AFM was recorded on the spot and has stated that the cause of burning of wheat crops may not be attributed for sparking due to electrical system as fitting of accessories, cable,

                        Bijender Vs. DHBVNL etc.

                                   …3…

conductor are in set right position. There was no spot/marks of burning instance below and nearby the H. Pole mounting Sub Station. No such incident of fire had taken place in the field of the complainant on the alleged date time and place. All the other allegations have been denied by the  opposite parties. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Dismissal of complaint with costs is prayed for.

3.     In  evidence, the complainant has produced his own affidavit Ex. C-1, electricity bill Ex. C-2, copy of application dated 17.4.2015 Ex. C-3, copy of fire report Ex. C-4, copy of general Diary details/report Ex. C-5, copy of application Ex. C-6, copy of letter dated 22.4.2015 Ex. C-7, copy of letter dated 28.4.2015 Ex. C-8 and copy of Jamabandi Ex. C-9 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, the opposite parties have produced the copy of letter dated 21.4.2015 Ex. OP-1, copy of letter dated 24.4.2015 Ex. OP-2, copy of letter dated 6.5.2015 Ex. OP-3, copy of letter dated 12.6.2015 Ex. OP-4, photographs Ex. OP-5 to Ex. OP-7, CD Ex. OP-8 and affidavit of Sh. Virender Singh Malik, SDO Ex. OP-9 and closed the evidence.  

4.     We have heard the Ld. Counsel of both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file. We also gone through the report of AFM  dated 6.5.2015 who inspected the spot after the period of 18 days and he mentioned in his report that there is no spot/mark of burning instance due to sparking nearby the transformer SOP. He further  alleged that allegation of burning of wheat crop is quite illegal and there is no proof of burning of wheat

                        Bijender Vs. DHBVNL etc.

                                   …4…

crop. The above said report is not believable that the wheat crop has not been burnt due to fire.   

5.     Now we are coming on the point  that whether wheat crop of the complainant has been burnt due to huge sparking in the transformer or not. It is proved on the file that the wheat crop  of the complainant has been burnt due to fire  as per document Ex. C-4 i.e. fire report as well as Ex. C-8 report of the  SDO, Agriculture, Narwana dated 28.4.2015. Both documents do not prove the cause of fire which shows the crop of the complainant brunt due to sparking in the transformer. It is not mentioned in the above reports that the wheat crop has been burnt due to sparking in the transformer. We have gone through the document Ex. C-5 i.e. DDR dated 17.5.2015 reported to the police regarding burning of the wheat crop. It is mentioned in the DDR that two police officers were deputed for verification of the cause of fire and was directed to inspect the site of the complainant and submitted the detail report regarding cause of fire but complainant failed to produce the detail investigation report, reason best known to the complainant why he has not placed the investigation report on the file.

6.     In view of the above discussion, the complainant has not been able to  prove cause of alleged fire. We are of the considered view that opposite parties cannot be blamed for alleged loss in this complaint. Hence, there is no deficiency in service  on the part of the opposite parties. So the complaint of the complainant is dismissed. Parties will

 

 

                        Bijender Vs. DHBVNL etc.

                                   …5…

bear their own expenses.  Copies of order be supplied to the parties under the rule. File be consigned to the record-room after due compliance.

Announced on: 28.4.2016

 

                                                                President,

 Member                 Member               District Consumer Disputes                                                               Redressal Forum, Jind

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                Bijender Vs. DHBVNL etc.

                                  

 

Present:  Sh. Mahabir Sheoran Adv. for complainant.

              Sh. Pawanjit Saini Adv. for opposite parties.

 

              Remaining arguments heard. To come up on 28.4.2016 for orders.

                                                                  President,

                Member              Member         DCDRF, Jind

                                                                  22.4.2016

 

Present:  Sh. Mahabir Sheoran Adv. for complainant.

              Sh. Pawanjit Saini Adv. for opposite parties.

 

               Order announced. Vide our separate order of even date, the complaint is dismissed. File be consigned to record room after due compliance. 

                                                               President,

                Member              Member         DCDRF, Jind

                                                                  28.4.2016

 

 

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.