West Bengal

Bankura

CC/38/2016

Satyanarayan Banerjee - Complainant(s)

Versus

Station Manager, W.B.S.E.D.C.L., Onda C.C.C - Opp.Party(s)

Durgaprasad Sarkar

23 Mar 2023

ORDER

    IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION BANKURA

  Consumer Complaint No. 38/2016

Date of Filing: 15-06-2016

Before:                                        

1. Samiran Dutta                              Ld. President.      

2. Rina Mukherjee                          Ld. Member. 

3. Siddhartha Sankar Bhui            Ld. Member.

 

For the Complainant:  Ld Advocate Jayanta Kr Mukhopadhyay

For the O.P.Ld Advocate Jayanta Chowdhury

 

Complainant  

Satyanarayan Banerjee, S/o Damodar Banerjee, Vill & PO-Mankhamar, Bankura

 

Opposite Party          

Station Manager, Onda C.C.C., W.B.S.E.D.C.L., P.O. & P.S.- Onda, Dist- Bankura

 

 JUDGEMENT 

Dated:23-03-2023

This is an application u/s 12 of the Consumer Protectiion Act, 1986 filed against the O.P. praying for compensation of Rs.7,57,000/- with interest and other reliefs.

The complainant’s case is that he is a bona fide domestic consumer under the O .P. bearing Consumer I/D 201819779 and Meter no.BR318459 and has been enjoying electricity service from the O.P. in the 1^st  Floor premises with installation of meter in the said Floor but on 04-03-2016 at about 11 a.m. the aforesaid meter suddenly got blusted producing heavy sound and the 1^st Floor premises of the complainant caught fire and the fire flared up and the house of the complainant was gutted by fire including the electrical wirings, household articles, fittings and electrical equipments. The complainant has estimated the loss and damage to the tune of Rs.7,57,000/- as shown in separate sheet to the written complaint. The incident of fire was intimated to the O.P. on 04-03-2016 which was registered as Complaint No.1727864 with further reportings to other Govt. officials like B.D.O., Onda Block, Bankura, S.D.O., Bankura and District Magistrate, Bankura and O.C., Onda P.S. (vide GDE No.168, dt.04-03-2016).

The Fire Brigade, Bankura rushed to the spot and accessed into the place of incidence and with their all possible measures and efforts the fire could be extinguished but they failed to save the valuable properties as mentioned in the written complaint.                                                                                            

                                                                                                                                                                                          Contd……p/2

Page: 2

According to the complainant the incident took place owing to faulty supply of electricity and installation of defective and poor standard meter and as such O.P. has to compensate the loss and damage caused to the complainant for such devastating fire for the bursting of the meter installed by the O.P.

The O.P. contested the case by filing a written version denying all the material allegations made in the complaint contending inter alia that immediately after receipt of the complaint they rushed to the spot and disconnected the service cable from the poll side and on 16-03-2016 an inspection was conducted by Mr. Apurba Srivastava, A.E. & S.M, Onda CCC with Mr.Koushik Chowdhury, SAE (E) and Durgadas Mahato, L.M. and another inspection was held on 20-08-2016 in presence of said Apurba Srivastava, Koushik Chowdhury and other dignitaries of the O.P.  According to the Inspection report the Meter room was much damp and short circuit in such damp condition may cause the accidental fire to the meter. So the O.P. has no fault and negligence behind such accidental fire and as such they are not liable to pay any compensation as claimed.

Be it mentioned here that on the prayer of the complainant an Advocate Commissioner was appointed by the Order of this Commission dated: 18-04-2017 and Sri Durgadas Roy, Advocate Commissioner submitted the local Inspection report on 12-07-2017 along with Field Note stating therein the damaged household items including electrical equipments caused by such accidental fire but the conection cable from electric poll to the meter box was found intact by the Ld. Commissioner.

-:Decision with reasons:-

Admittedly it reveals from the Inspection report of the O.P. authority that the meter in question was completely burnt and bursted located in the 1^st Floor of the premises of the complainant and the intensity of the bursting and fire was so high that huge sound was produced and damage was caused to the premises of the complainant and the household articles inside the room were also not spared from the clutches of fire.

            The Inspection report of the O.P. authority dt.16-03-2016 shows that the incoming service cable from existing poll to outer wall of the Balcony is in good condition but inner part of the cable was totally burnt and the energy meter outgoing cable Main switch and room wiring was totally burnt. Though the cause of fire could not be detected by the O.P. authority but by further   Inspection report on 20-08-2016 it was opined that as the meter room was damped the short circuit may be the ground of such accidental fire because of damped meter wall. As the meter was completely burnt no technical report could be obtained for the meter testing. So the technical report is silent as to the cause of burning and bursting of the meter but the fact remains that the fire along with sound was produced by such burning and bursting of the meter.                                                                                      

                                                                                                                                                                                       Contd…….p/3

Page: 3

There is no material on record to suggest that the meter was defective and the explosion of meter may occur for some manufacturing defect of the meter. Incoming connection from the poll to the meter has not been affected by such fire but the outgoing line from the meter point to the entire wirings of the complainant’s premises has been burnt. It may be so that due to sudden loading there may develop electrical fault in the wirings of the complainant’s premises which may result such accident causing fire and bursting to the meter due to overloading but there is no Technical expert report to substantiate this fact. The negligence on the part of the O.P. and the complainant and the manufacturing defect of the meter cannot be said to be attributable to the cause of accidental fire in the given facts of the case.

Now the question is who is to compensate the loss and damage of the complainant’s property. Both the complainant and the O.P. have pleaded no fault on their part for such accidental fire. In such cases the doctrine of strict liability comes into play where neither party has any fault, any negligence but damage of property is proved. In other words the doctrine of strict liability may be simply stated as follows:

When a person may be liable for some harm even though he is not negligent in causing the same or there is no intention to cause the damage but the exception to strict liability is that (1) The consumer has no fault (2) There is act of God and (3) There is act of third party.

In this case neither the Consumer’s fault nor the act of God and act of third party is attributable to the cause of the accident.

The Supreme Court in AIR 2002 SC 551 (MP Electricity Board Vs.Shail Kumari & Ors.) has applied the doctrine of strict liability in assessing the loss and damage in a case of electrocution at the instance of the live electrical wires of the M.P. Electricity Board

The Consumer Commission is reluctant to apply the doctrine of strict liability in consumer cases where principle of tortious liability is not applicable but in appropriate cases the Consumer Commission may regognise and protect the consumer rights as defined in Section-2(9) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which includes the right to be protected against the marketing of goods, products or services which are hazardous to life and property.                                  

                                                                                                                                                                                       Contd……..p/4

Page: 4

In the above mentioned Supreme Court decision electricity has been defined as dangerous. In this case the ration of the decision can be applied to the proposition that the electrical meter which is an instrument of supply of electricity can also be considered as dangerous and hazardous and accordingly in view of Section 2 (9) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 the Consumer Commission has also the duty to protect the interest of the electrical consumer from any loss and damage arising out of electrical meter installed by the O.P./Electricity authority WBSEDCL.

In another decision the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar & Ors [(2008) 9 SCC 527] at Para-24 held as follows: -

    “Strict liability focuses on the nature of the defendants' activity rather than, as in negligence, the way in which it is carried on. There are many activities which are so hazardous that they may constitute a danger to the person or property of another. The principle of strict liability states that the undertakers of these activities have to compensate for the damage caused by them irrespective of any fault on their part………..”

The ratio of the principle of strict law may be applicable to the  present facts and circumstances of the case as the complainant being the consumer of Electricity under the O.P. has suffered pecuniary loss and damage to his household property due to such devastating fire out of the bursting and burning of the electrical meter installed by the O.P. but the extent of loss and damage and the valuation thereof could not be properly assessed in this case in absence of cogent evidence to that effect but taking into consideration the admitted fact of loss and damage to various household property of the complainant for such devastating fire of the electric meter for no-fault of the consumer/complainant and the O.P. authority the Commission in its best judgement assessment fixes the extent of loss and damage to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- payable by the O.P. in favour of the complainant.

The case therefore succeeds in part. 

                                                                                                                                                                                          Contd……p/5

Page: 5

 

Hence it is ordered…….

That the case be and the same is allowed in part against the O.P.

The O.P. is directed to pay to the complainant Rs.1,00,000/- as substantive compensation for the loss and damage of the property in question within one month from this date in default the same may be realized in due process of law.

Both parties be supplied copy of this Order free of cost.                                                     

 

____________________                   ________________              _________________

HON’BLE   PRESIDENT           HON’BLE MEMBER       HON’BLE MEMBER