Punjab

Sangrur

CC/330/2018

Swaran Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Rishav Dev Singh

19 Sep 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

 

                                                               

                                                Complaint No.  330

                                                Instituted on:    08.08.2018

                                                Decided on:       19.09.2019

 

Swaran Singh son of Mohinder Singh, resident of Village Ahankheri, Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur (148001).

                                                        ..Complainant

                                        Versus

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, The Mall, Patiala through its Secretary cum CMD (147001).

2. SDO/AEE, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub Division, Malerkotla 148 023, District Sangrur.

                                                        ..Opposite parties

Counsel for the complainant      : Shri Rishavdev Singh,Adv.

Counsel for opposite parties      : Shri Mohit Verma, Adv.

Quorum:   Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

                Ms.Vandana Sidhu, Member

                Shri V.K.Gulati, Member

 

Order by : Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President.

1.             The complainant filed this complaint pleading that the complainant is the sole owner of Khewat No.59, Khatauni No.129 total land measuring 5.68 Acre i.e 23 Bighas 7 Biswas as per revenue record of village Ahankheri.    Further case of the complainant is that the complainant is the joint owner with Om Parkash son of Buta Ram in Khewat No.124/130 and 213/214 to the extent of 7 Bighas 15 Biswas i.e. 1.3/4 acres out of total land measuring 6.5 acres i.e. 15 Bighas 11 Biswas. That father of the complainant was the consumer of OPs having one 20 BHP motor connection bearing account number AP-77.

2.             The case of the complainant is that on 21.4.2018 at about 2.00 PM, when the complainant was working in the fields, then suddenly sparking erupted in 66 KV line and due to sparking the wheat crop of the complainant and adjoining farmers caught fire within few minutes and crop standing in the land measuring 22 Bighas 19 biswas i.e. 5.68 acres out of land measuring 7 bighas 15 biswas of the complainant i.e 1.3/4 acres engulfed and gutted into fire, the intimation of which was immediately given to the police of PS Sandaur and also got recorded DDR number 23 dated 21.4.2018 at PS Sandaur. The complainant also informed the officials of the OPs.  Thereafter Sub Divisional Magistrate Malerkotla visited the spot and ordered the inquiry and Halqa Patwari after visiting the affected area prepared his report regarding the loss and in the report it has been specifically stated that the crop was burnt due to electric wire of transformer in 1.3/4 acres of land. The complainant also lodged the claim with the opposite parties.  Further case of the complainant is that as per the report of Agriculture Department, there was an average produce of  5557 KG per hectare and the reserve price was Rs.1700/- per quintal, therefore, the complainant suffered the loss to the tune of Rs.2,26,100/-.  Further it is averred that the complainant also suffered loss of straw of 22 bighas 19 biswas of land i.e. 4.3/4 acres i.e. 25 quintal per acre @ Rs.350/- per quintal, which comes to Rs.56,708/-, meaning thereby the complainant has claimed an amount of Rs.2,82,000/- on account of crop loss.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.2,83,000/- along with  interest @ 18% per annum and further claimed compensation of Rs.50,000/- for mental agony, harassment and Rs.22,000/- on account of litigation expenses.

3.             In reply filed by the OPs, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is not maintainable, that the complaint is false and frivolous one, that the complainant has dragged the OPs into unwanted litigation, that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint and that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands.  On merits, the allegations of the complainant have been denied in toto. It is further stated that the OPs never charged any amount from the complainant, as such present complaint is beyond the ambit and scope of the Forum. It is stated further that the 66 KV     electric lines are not under the control of OPs and the same are under control of PSTCL.    It has been denied that the complainant ever approached the OPs. It is further denied that the fire broke out in the fields of the complainant on 20.4.2018 due to sparking or on account of short circuit of main electric wire passing along with the fields of the complainant.  The other allegations levelled in the complaint have been denied in toto.

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-7 and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Ops has produced Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-3 affidavit and copy of documents and closed evidence.

5.             The complainant has also filed rejoinder whereby the allegations of the OPs have been denied and the averments in the complaint have been reiterated.

6.             We have gone through the pleadings of the parties and documents placed on record by the parties as well as heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

7.             The learned counsel for the complainant has argued vehemently that on 21.4.2018 at about 2.00 PM, when the complainant was working in the fields, then suddenly sparking erupted in 66 KV line and due to sparking the wheat crop of the complainant and adjoining farmers caught fire within few minutes and crop standing in the land measuring 22 Bighas 19 biswas out of land measuring 7 bighas 15 biswas of the complainant engulfed and gutted into fire and suffered loss to the tune of Rs.2,26,100/-, but the Ops failed to pay the loss of Rs.2,26,100/- to the complainant despite best efforts. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs has denied the allegations in the complaint in toto. It is further stated that the OPs never charged any amount from the complainant, as such present complaint is beyond the ambit and scope of the Forum. It is stated further that the 66 KV electric lines are not under the control of OPs and the same are under control of PSTCL. It has contended that the complainant never approached the OPs. It is further denied that the fire broke out in the fields of the complainant on 20.4.2018 due to sparking or on account of short circuit of main electric wire passing along with the fields of the complainant.  Lastly, the learned counsel for the OPs has contended that the complaint should be dismissed with special costs.

8.             A bare perusal of the written reply reveals that the OPs have denied the allegations of the complainant in toto. But, we are unable to accept such a contention of the OPs as the complainant has produced a plenty of documents on record to substantiate the case that actually a fire broke out on 20.04.2018 in the fields of the complainant and suffered huge loss of wheat crop.  The complainant has also produced on record the copy of jamabandi Ex.C-3, which clearly shows that the complainant is the owner of the land in question.  Further Ex.C-4 is the copy of DDR, which clearly reveals that the wheat crop of the complainant damaged due to sparking.  Though, it is contended by the learned counsel for the OPs that the wheat crop has not suffered any damage due to the negligence of any of the officials of the OPs, but, the fact remains that the fire broke out due to the sparking from the electric wires of the Ops and standing wheat crop damaged to ashes.  The complainant has also produced his own sworn affidavit Ex.C-1 to support his contention in the complaint. The learned counsel for the complainant has contended vehemently that per acre produce of wheat is about 5557 Kgs per hectare as is evident from the document Ex.C-6.  

9.             Further we have also perused the copy of jamabandi, Ex.C-2 produced by the complainant on record and find that the complainant is the owner of the land in question as claimed by the complainant in the complaint, as such we find that the complainant is entitled to get the claim from the OPs on account of loss of wheat crop due to fire.

10.           Further it is worth mentioning here that while  confronted with similar situation, where complainant’s crops of sugarcane, coconut and chikku were burnt because of sparking from electric wires passing over the fields of the complainant, the electricity was provided for pump set for irrigation and  no steps were taken by the board to place the electric wires properly, in such a situation, National Consumer Commission in The Assistant Executive Engineer and others versus Sri Neelakanta Goiuda Siddangouda Patil 2002(2) CPC 288, upheld the order of the District Forum, as also, the order of State Commission while allowing the complaint and awarding compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-. Similarly, in a case where farm house, tube well and stock of husk of the complainant were damaged in fire due to breaking out by electric connection, the State Consumer Commission, Haryana, in Sub Divisional Officer, H.S.E.B. and others versus Ramesh Kumar 1997(1) CPC 278 allowed the complaint. The Hon’ble Punjab State Commission has also taken similar view in Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. versus Balbir Singh, First Appeal No.92 of 2015 decided on 7.10.2016.

11.           Now, coming to the quantum of compensation payable to the complainant.  It is proved on record from the documents that the wheat crop belonging to the complainant standing in 1.3/4 acres of land was damaged.  The complainant has claimed 5557 Kgs of produce per acre and 25 quintals of straw per acre which seems to be on the higher side but we are of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the OPs are directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.35,000/- per acre as compensation.

12.           In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct Ops to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.61,250/- (Rs.35000/- cost of wheat per acre x 1.75 area of land)   along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 08.08.2018 till realisation.  The OPs are further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.10,000/- in lieu of consolidated amount of compensation for mental tension agony and Rs.5,000/- on account of  litigation expenses.

13.          This order be complied with by the opposite parties within 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. A certified copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost as per rules. File be consigned to records.

 

                        Pronounced.

                        September 19, 2019. 

 

 

        Sd/-                                                          sd/-  

(Vinod Kumar Gulati)  (Vandana Sidhu) (Amrinder Singh Sidhu)

          Member                  Member                 President

                                          ↓

                                I don’t agree with

                                this order.

                                        sd/-      

                                (Vandana Sidhu)

                                    Member