Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member
This is an appeal filed by org. complainant whose complaint has been dismissed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Satara.
The facts to the extent material may be stated as under :-
The complainant/appellant herein had filed consumer complaint against the M.S.E.D.Co. alleging that he had taken electric connection for supply of energy from the M.S.E.D.Co. Accordingly, M.S.E.D.Co. had installed DP at one corner of his field and from that DP he was given electric supply. According to the complainant, while giving electric supply from DP to his house and field official of the M.S.E.D.Co. fixed the wires negligently. Resultantly, there used to be sparks from the said electric live wires. The complainant pleaded that he had grown methi grass in his field and had spent `77,099/- but due to spark falling from DP wires on 14/12/2004 his methi grass got burnt totally and he sustained damage and he reported the facts to the Police and they had recorded Panchanama. Complainant had informed the incident of fire to the official of M.S.E.D.Co. and claimed `1,49,099/- from M.S.E.D.Co. and since, it was not given, he filed consumer complaint for getting compensation of `1,49,099/- plus interest.
Opponent filed written statement and denied the allegations made by the complainant. According to the opponent, transformer was installed above 5’ from the earth and for the last 15 years it has been looked after and maintained properly by the M.S.E.D.Co. The complainant had never made any complaint about the spark coming out from the said DP. Neighbouring farmers had also no grievance against the said DP and transformer. The M.S.E.D.Co. officials denied the allegations that there was spark from the DP and said spark ultimately burnt to ashes the methi grass cultivated by the complainant in his field. They pleaded that in Gat No.558 the complainant had not at all cultivated methi grass, if one see the 7/12 extract of that particular years. They also pleaded that since last three years in Maini Sub-Station there has been load shedding and on 14/12/2004 between 1.00 p.m. to 3.00 p.m. there was total load shedding. So, there was no possibility of any spark coming out from said DP and causing damage by fire to the complainant’s methi grass. They therefore pleaded that complaint is absolutely false and should be dismissed. The District Consumer Forum in the course of inquiry was pleased to appoint Electric Inspector as ‘Court Commissioner’. The District Consumer Forum considering the documents and affidavits filed by rival parties held that the complainant was not consumer of the M.S.E.D.Co. and M.S.E.D.Co. was not guilty of deficiency in service of any kind and therefore, it was pleased to dismiss the complaint. Aggrieved by this dismissal, complainant had filed this appeal.
We heard Mr.S.A. Masal, Advocate for the appellant and Mr.D.D. Rananaware, Advocate for the respondents.
We are finding that besides there has been load shedding in that particular area on the day of incident, there is report of Court Commissioner which is very germane to the point. The Court Commissioner in his report had specifically mentioned that distance between DP wires and the field was considerable and it was not possible that because of friction between wires, there would be sparks as alleged by the complainant. So, the expert Electrical Inspector categorically ruled out the incident as alleged by the complainant. He was an Electric Inspector appointed by the Government of Maharashtra. He was an independent person and he has given categorically expert opinion looking to the situation of the electrical wires going towards DP. It was not possible though there would be any sort of sparks by friction of 2-3 wires and therefore, the incident as alleged by the complainant had been disproved by the report of Court Commissioner. District Consumer Forum was of the view that there was load shedding in those days and because of load shedding, it was not possible for spark as alleged by the complainant on the day in question. Moreover, the Electric Inspector categorically stated that when the incident took place as alleged by the complainant, the feeder was closed due to load shedding and therefore, it was not possible for electric short-circuit of any kind and the spark emanating therefrom. In this view, we are of the view that the Learned District Consumer Forum rightly held that the complainant had failed to prove that there was spark because of friction of electric wires going towards DP from the field of the complainant and therefore, District Consumer Forum held that complainant’s allegation that because electric sparks emanating from electric wires his methi grass was burnt to ashes was appearing to be improper and relying on the Electric Inspector’s report, District Consumer Forum gave finding that no such incident has occurred as alleged by the complainant. District Consumer Forum was of the view that from the field of the complainant, road was passing and that road is very frequently used by the people and somebody might have thrown bidi/cigarette and that might have resulted into fire. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, finding recorded by the District Consumer Forum against the complainant is appearing to be just and proper. The impugned order is well reasoned and sustainable in law. We are finding no merit in the appeal. Hence, we pass the following order :-
-: ORDER :-
1. Appeal stands dismissed.
2. No order as to costs.
3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
Pronounced
Dated 21st February 2011.
