NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/2170/2010

UHBVNL - Complainant(s)

Versus

KARTAR SINGH - Opp.Party(s)

MR R.S. BADHRAN

29 Nov 2010

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 2170 OF 2010
 
(Against the Order dated 05/04/2010 in Appeal No. 216/2010 of the State Commission Haryana)
1. UHBVNL
Through its Sub Divisional Officer, Sub Division No. 3
Rohtak
Haryana
2. J.E. UHBVNL
Bhagwatipur
Rohtak
Haryana
3. FOREMAN, UHBVNL
Bhagwatipur
Rohtak
Haryana
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. KARTAR SINGH
R/o. V.P.O. Bhagwati Pur
Rohtak
Haryana
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.N.P. SINGH, PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. SURESH CHANDRA, MEMBER

For the Petitioner :
Mr. B.S. Sharma for Mr. R.S. Badhran, Advocate
For the Respondent :
In Person

Dated : 29 Nov 2010
ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent in person. Factual matrix are that buffalo of respondent which came in contact with electric wire provided by petitioner Corporation, got electrocuted causing instantaneous death. Police authorities were informed and petitioner Corporation was also informed of the loss suffered by respondent. Getting no respite, respondent filed a complaint before the District Forum claiming damages and District Forum on a strength of death report issued by Veterinary surgeon, certified death of buffalo due to electrocution while accepting complaint. Defence of petitioner Corporation before District Forum, which is also re-agitated before us is that all electric installations were properly maintained by petitioner - Corporation and they were not answerable for any negligence, committed on the part of respondent. District Forum, however, having overruled contentions raised on behalf of petitioner saddled them to pay a compensation of Rs.27,000/- along with interest @ 9% p.a. in addition to cost of litigation of Rs.2,000/-. Appeal filed by petitioner Corporation before State Commission was dismissed in limine. Both District Forum and State Commission had taken notice of various judicial pronouncements laid down by the National Commission and also the Apex Court and were obliged to refer to the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of Rajasthan State Electricity Board Vs. Charan Singh reported in 1999 (1) CPC 241 (SC). Since both fora below have based their finding on unempathic evidence, we do not find any merit in this revision petition. Revision petition, in the circumstances, is dismissed with no order as to costs.

 
......................J
B.N.P. SINGH
PRESIDING MEMBER
......................
SURESH CHANDRA
MEMBER

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.