CC Filed on 14.07.2010
Disposed on 18.12.2010
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR.
Dated: 18th day of December 2010
PRESENT:
Sri. G.V.HEGDE, President.
Sri. T.NAGARAJA, Member.
Smt. K.G.SHANTALA, Member.
---
Consumer Complaint No. 130/2010
Between:
Jahan Ara Begum, W/o. K.A. Nissar Ahamed, Major, No. 990, Sulthan Thippasandra, Opp. 2 K.V. Station, M.B. Road, Kolar. (By Advocate Sri. S. Sreekrishna & others) | ….Complainant |
V/S 1. The Superintendent Engineer, BESCOM, M. Circle, Kolar Circle, Kolar. 2. The Executive Engineer (Ele.) C.O. & M Division, BESCOM, Kolar. | ….Opposite Parties |
ORDERS
This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying for a direction against the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs.70,265/- with interest at 12% p.a. from 10.10.2008 till the date of payment with costs, etc., and further to direct the OPs to restore electric supply to the building in question.
2. The material facts of complainant’s case may be stated as follows:
That the complainant is the owner of building No. 990 situated at Sultan Thippasandra, opp. 220 K.V. station, M.B. Road, Kolar. This building was given on rent to run the office of OP.1 and subsequently the same premises is in the occupation and possession of Executive Engineer, Major Works Division, Kolar (OP.2) with the consent of OP.1. There was electric connection to the said building provided by BESCOM, Kolar Circle, Kolar. That on 10.10.2008 the electric wiring in the said premises burnt as a 11 K.V. line wire fell down on the secondary line drafted from 2 K.V. station. The loss estimated as per the Government Electric Contractor-Shahbaz Electricals is Rs.70,265/- as per the estimation dated 30.03.2010. It is alleged that the OPs were responsible for maintaining high tension wires which fell down on the secondary line connecting electricity to the premises of complainant. Therefore it is alleged that the OPs were liable to make good the loss and earlier they had agreed for it, but they did not comply with it inspite of repeated requests. Therefore the complainant has filed the present complaint on 14.07.2010.
3. The OPs appeared and admitted that they were responsible for maintaining the different electric lines and they also admitted their occupation of the building in question on lease from complainant. They admitted the falling of high tension wire on the secondary line and also the burning of the electric wirings in the premises of complainant. They contended that the loss caused due to the said accident is covered by Cholomandam MS General Insurance policy with effect from 29.09.2007 to 28.09.2008 and in this case the accident had actually occurred on 26.09.2008. As per the letter dated 01.07.2008 of complainant and that they are trying to settle the claim through insurance coverage. Further they contended that as per the estimation of Asst. Executive Engineer (Ele.) Urban Sub-Division, Kolar the total loss comes to Rs.22,050/- for replacement of damaged materials in the said building. It is contended that the estimation of the complainant is highly exaggerated and without basis and that in the earliest representations made by complainant to OPs dated 10.10.2008 and 13.10.2009, the complainant had estimated the loss suffered at Rs.30,000/-. Therefore they contended that the claim of complainant is not maintainable.
4. The complainant and OPs filed affidavits by way of evidence. The complainant filed written arguments. The Learned Counsel for OPs addressed arguments.
5. We are satisfied that the complainant is a ‘Consumer’ and this complaint is maintainable before this Forum. That fact is not challenged by OPs. From the rival contentions the only question that arises for consideration is: What is the loss suffered by complainant due to falling of high tension wire on the service lines?
6. The complainant has produced copy of her representation dated 13.10.2009 claiming it to be the second representation. The correspondences between parties show that the complainant had also filed earlier the same representation on 10.10.2008. In the representation dated 13.10.2009 the complainant has stated as follows:
“You are aware that a 11 KV line wire fell on the secondary line drafted from 2 KV station, on 10.10.2008 due to which the electric wiring in the said premises burnt and I suffered losses which are estimated to about Rs.30,000-00. Since these losses are occurred due to fault of the company, this issue is discussed with you and you have promised to make good the losses either by new electrification or settlement through the insurance”.
It appears the complainant is not an illiterate lady. Her husband was a Politician and was an Ex-MLA. The representation noted above clearly states that the electric wiring in the said premises burnt and the complainant suffered losses which were estimated to about Rs.30,000/-. We perused the estimations produced by complainant as well as the estimation produced by OPs. The complainant has claimed in the estimation now produced the value of 17 fans, two exhaust fans, two geezers, 36 tube lights, 36 chocks. The OPs have not taken into consideration the value of these electric equipments. There is no evidence that these electric equipments were installed at the time of letting out the building and they had become useless. Unless it is shown that they were in existence at the time of lease and they became useless due to accident, the complainant cannot claim the value of it. In respect of some other items the estimation of the complainant is on higher side than the estimation of OPs. Considering the previous admission of complainant regarding the estimation of loss suffered by her at Rs.30,000/-, we think the loss suffered by complainant may be estimated at Rs.25,000/-. The OPs should have reimbursed the loss within 2-3 months from the date of accident. Till now they had not reimbursed the loss. Therefore we think interest at 9% p.a. may be awarded from 01.01.2009 till the date of payment. The insurance if any for coverage of loss to the third party properties, is between OPs and the Insurance Company. The OPs can claim the loss if permissible under the terms of insurance. The complainant cannot be made to wait till the payment of compensation of Insurance Company in respect of this accident. The OPs may keep the amount themselves if insurance amount is settled by the Insurance Company. Hence this point is held accordingly.
7. The OPs did not dispute for reconnecting electric supply after proper wiring of the premises. Therefore the complainant after completion of the wiring work and submitting the test report as may be required, request for supply of electricity. Hence we pass the following:
O R D E R
The complaint is allowed with costs of Rs.1,000/-. The OPs shall pay Rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty-five thousand only) towards compensation to complainant with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on the said amount from 01.01.2009 till the date of payment within one month from the date of this order.
Dictated to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced in open Forum this the 18th day of December 2010.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
