Haryana

Karnal

149/2013

Darshan Singh S/o Bishna Ram - Complainant(s)

Versus

SDO Uttar Haryana Bijle Vitran Nigam Limited., Superintending Engineer UHBVN - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. S.S. Moonak

29 Jul 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.149 OF 2013

                                                               Date of instt. 19.03.2013

                                                               Date of decision: 26.08.2015

 

Darshan Singh son of Sh.Bishna Ram resident of village Pangala tehsil Assandh District  Karnal.                                                                      

                                                                   ……….Complainant.

                             Versus

1.SDO (OP) Sub Division, Utri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Assandh District Karnal.

2.Superintending Engineer, Utri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Kunjpura  Road, Karnal.

                                                           ……… Opposite Parties.

                   Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer

                   Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma……. President.

                   Smt. Shashi Sharma ………Member.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…… Member.  

         

 Present:         Sh.S.S.Moonak Advocate for the complainant.

                     Sh.G.S.Arora Advocate for the Ops.

ORDER:        

 

                   The present complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act  on the averments that on 23.5.2008, buffaloes of the complainant while  grazing near  the fields of  Jasbir Singh and Net Ram in village Pangala tehsil Assandh district Karnal came into contact   with  stay wire installed with the electricity pole and died due to electrocution as electric current was running through the stay wire. The complainant reported the matter to the police, Police Station Assandh, and DDR No.12 dated 23.5.2008 was entered in that regard.  Post mortems were also conducted on the dead bodies of both the buffaloes by the Veterinary Doctor.   The complainant moved an application to the Opposite Party ( in short OP) No.1  as well as  Deputy Commissioner, Karnal, but of no avail. He received  letter dated 29.2.2012 that his file was closed. No reason was given in the said letter.  The complainant has filed the present complaint against the Ops alleging deficiency in services on the part of Ops.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the Ops, who put into appearance and filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant.  Objections have been raised that the complainant has no loucs standi  and cause of action to file the present complaint; that the complaint is not maintainable because the complainant is not consumer of the Ops; that the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands; that the present complaint is an abuse of the process of law; that the complaint is bad for nonjoinder and misjoinder of the parties; that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint as per Section 145 of the Electricity Act and  that the complaint is bad for want of notice u/s 161 of the Electricity Act.

                  On merits, the Ops have denied all the events of the incident and have submitted that the present complaint has been filed just to extort money from the Ops. It has also been submitted that no information was given by the complainant to the Ops regarding the incident, if any. The complainant has not suffered any loss, due to any fault  of Ops, therefore, he is not entitled to any compensation.

 

3.                In the evidence of complainant,  he has filed his affidavitEx.CW1/A   alongwith documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C16.

4.                On the other hand, affidavit of  Sh.Gagan Pandey SDO, Ex. Ex.O1 has been filed.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file very carefully.

6.                As per allegations of the complainant his two buffaloes had died due to electrocution as the same came into contact with  stay wire installed with the pole installed by Ops  and electric current was running  through that stay wire. The photograph  Ex.C13 shows that two buffaloes  were lying dead near the  stay  wire attached with the electric pole . The post mortem reports Ex.C2 and Ex.C3 are sufficient to establish that buffaloes died due to electrocution. The complainant has also reported the matter to the police and the copy of the police report is Ex.C1. The documents Ex.C8 and Ex.C9 clearly establish that the accident had occurred due to non providing the egg insulator with the stay wire.  In Ex.C9 it was mentioned that the work was carried out by the contractor’s labour, but it was the responsibility of the Ops to get the stay wire properly insulated. Thus, there was negligence on the part of Ops in not getting the stay wire properly insulated. In this way, the accident had taken place due to negligence of Ops. 

 

7.                 The Learned counsel for the OP has laid emphasis on the  contention that  the complainant is not consumer of the Ops, therefore, his complaint is not maintainable before this Forum

8.               In C.G.M., P &O, NPDCL & Ors. Versus Kopppu Duddarajam and another IV(2008) CPJ, 139, the deceased was sitting in front of the Panchayat office and live wire fell on him as a result of which he died due to electrocution.  Under those circumstances, it was held by the Hon’ble National Commission that  villagers  pay taxes to village Panchayat and power consumption charges to electricity company, therefore, they are consumers and being beneficiaries  are entitled to get compensation.   In 2008 Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division  & Ors. Vs. Budhdhan IV(2008) CPJ 278(NC) the live wire fell over the  wife of the complainant causing her death.  The Electricity Distribution  Division  raised the plea that  someone  threw green leaves of sugarcane on the electricity wire and made the electric line shot  breaking the electric wire and there was no negligence on the part of the Electricity Department. Under those circumstances, it was held  by  the Hon,ble National Commission  that there was deficiency in services and negligence on the part of the Electricity Department because such event could not take place unless the wire was being placed very low and in reach of the people while passing by.  In  Parmila Devi and others Vs.Dakshini Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and another, IV(2008) CPJ 332, the deceased came into contact with the stay wire which was not insulted properly and deceased died due to shock.  Under those circumstances, it was held by  Hon’ble Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, that  proper precaution to insulate stay wire  was not taken  and there was negligence on the part of the Ops, therefore, compensation and cost were awarded.

9.                In view of the proposition of law  laid down in the afore discussed authorities, claim of the complainant regarding death of his two buffaloes which died as a result of electrocution  on account of coming into contact with stay wire of the electric pole, which was not properly insulated by the Ops, cannot be denied, because there was negligence and deficiency in services on the part of Ops in not insulating the stay wire properly.  According to the Post Mortem Report Ex.C2 and Ex.C3, age of one buffalo was approximately six and a half years and that of the other approximately three and a half years. Approximate market price of one of the buffalo was  Rs.30,000/- and that of other Rs.35000/-. Observation of the Veterinary Officer, regarding market price of the buffaloes cannot be ignored in the absence of any evidence to the contrary. As there was deficiency in services/negligence on the part of the Ops, the complainant is entitled to get compensation in respect of death of his two buffaloes, which died due to electrocution.

 

10.               As a result of the foregoing discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the Ops to make the payment of Rs.65,000/- ( i.e. cost of two buffalos Rs.30,000+ Rs.35000/-) to the complainant.   The complainant shall also be entitled for a sum of Rs.10,000/- for the  mental agony and harassment suffered by the complainant together with Rs.5500/- towards legal fee and litigation expenses. The Ops shall make the compliance of this order within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.  The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced
dated:26.08.2015                                                                              

                                               

                                                                   (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

              

 

 (Anil Sharma)          (Smt.Shashi Sharma)        

     Member.            Member.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                         

Present:         Sh.S.S.Moonak Advocate for the complainant.

                     Sh.G.S.Arora Advocate for the Ops.

 

                   Arguments partly heard. For remaining arguments, the case is adjourned to 26.8.2015.

 

Announced
dated:21.08.2015                                                                              

                                               

                                                                   (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

              

 

 (Anil Sharma)          (Smt.Shashi Sharma)        

     Member.            Member.

 

 

Present:         Sh.S.S.Moonak Advocate for the complainant.

                     Sh.G.S.Arora Advocate for the Ops.

 

                   Remaining arguments heard. Vide our separate order of the even date, the present complaint has  been accepted. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated:26.08.2015                                                                              

                                               

                                                                   (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

              

 

 (Anil Sharma)          (Smt.Shashi Sharma)        

     Member.            Member.