Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/15/2019

Smt Jayyamma, W/o Late Thimmabovi - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Assistant Executive Engineer - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.Thippeswamy.N

30 May 2019

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:01/01/2019

DISPOSED      ON:30/05/2019

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

C.C.NO:15/2019

 

DATED: 30^th MAY 2019

PRESENT :-         SRI.T.N.SREENIVASAIAH      :   PRESIDENT                                                     B.A., LL.B.,

                             SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

BSc.,MBA., DHA.,         :     LADY MEMBER

SRI. SHIVAKUMAR.K.N         :     MEMBER

                                      M.Com.LL.B.,

……COMPLAINANT/S	1. Smt. Jayamma, W/o Late Thimmabovi, Age: 42 Years, Coolie, R/o Avalipalya Village, Hosadurga Taluk.   2. Kumari. Pallavi,  D/o Late Thimmabovi, Age: 18 Years, Student,  R/o Avalipalya Village, Hosadurga Taluk.   (Reptd. By Sri.Thippeswamy. N, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Operation and Maintenance, BESCOM, Rural sub Division, Hosadurga, Chitradurga District.   2. The Executive Engineer (Elec) Operation and Maintenance, BESCOM, Chitradurga.   3. The Superintending Engineer (Elec), Operation and Maintenance, BESCOM, Chitradurga.   4. Sri.Kallesh, S/o Hanumanthappa, Major, R/o Avalipalya Village, Hosadurga Taluk, Chitradurga District.   (Reptd. By Sri.M. Umesh, Advocate for OP No.1 to 3 and Sri. Fathyarajan, Advocate for OP No.4)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainants u/Sec.12 of the C.P Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OPs to pay Rs.18,00,000/- towards compensation with interest at the rate of 12% p.a, and to grant such other reliefs.  

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainants is that, they are the wife and daughter of deceased Thimmabhovi.  OP No1 to 3 are the service providers with respect to electric supply, their duty casted upon to take care and safety measures to safeguard the interest of electricity users.  OP No.4 is also the resident of Avalipalya village, Hosadurga Taluk, he is an agriculturist having land in the said village.  It is further submitted that, on 03.10.2017 at about 8-00 AM, the husband and son of the complainant No.1 were went to bring Banana leaves from the Banana Garden, but they were not return to the home for regular time.  Thereafter, the complainants and their relatives were searched and shocked to see that, the husband and son of complainant No.1 were died near the garden of OP No.4 due to electrocution.  After the incident, a criminal case was registered in Hosadurga Police under Crime No.216/2017 for negligence against the OP No.4.  After investigation, the Police have filed the charge sheet against the OPs, the final report of the Police clearly shows that, there is a deficiency on the part of OPs.  It is further submitted that, during his life time, the husband of the complainant No.1 was doing agricultural work and monthly income of Rs.30,000/- p.m from the said work and the complainants are depending on the earnings of the deceased Thimmabhovi, who was aged about 48 years.  The son of the complainant No.1 was studying in 9^th standard at the time of electrocution.  OP No.1 to 3 are the electric suppliers, their duty is to maintain good condition of the same but, they are not maintaining the electric line in good condition.  The death of the husband and son of the complainant No.1 is due to negligence act on the part of OP No. 1 to 3, which is dereliction of duties and deficiency in service upon them.  It is further submitted that, on 10.10.2018 complainants sent a legal notice to the OPs through their counsel to get settle the claim but, they neither replied nor complied, thereby the OPs 1 to 3 have committed deficiency of service towards the complainants.  The complainants have taken electricity connection to their house in Avalipalya village, therefore, they are the consumers to the OPs 1 to 3, which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum and hence, prayed for allowing the complaint.

3.      After service of notice, OP No.1to 3 appeared through Sri. M. Umesh, Advocate and filed version on behalf of OP No.4 one Sri.Fathyarajan, Advocate appeared and filed version. 

According to the version filed by OP No.1 to 3, it is stated that, the complaint is not maintainable both in law and on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed in limine and this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.  It is further submitted that, it is a self negligence of the deceased persons.  The OP No.4 with great negligence, with a malafide intention, without observing the safety measures, voluntarily without the knowledge and permission of the OP No.1 to 3 has connected the electricity to the alleged land.  The Deputy Electrical Inspectorate has visited the spot and given report and as per the report, the OP No.4 is held liable for negligence of the alleged incident.  The OP No.1 to 4 have not violated any rules and regulations of any Indian Electricity Act and Rules.  In view of the wrong act done by the OP No.4, the question of violation of Sec.135 of the Indian Electricity Act and Rules does not arise.  The allegations made in para 2 and 3 are denied as false and put to strict proof of the same.  It is false to state that, on 03.10.2017 at about 8-00 AM, the husband and son of the complainant No.1 went to bring the Banana leaves from the Garden, but they were not returned and the complainants and their relatives were searched and shocked to see that they were died near the garden of OP No.4.  The allegations made in para 5 to 10 are denied as false.  It is further submitted that, there is no lapse, negligence or deficiency of service towards the complainants and the OP No.1 to 3 are not responsible for the accident and they are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainants.  Therefore, the present complaint is wholly misconceived, groundless and unsustainable in law and the same is liable to be dismissed.

According to the version filed by OP No.4 that, on 03.10.2017 at 8-00 AM the husband and son of the complainant No.1 went to bring the Banana leaves from the Garden and they were not returned to home on regular time.  Thereafter, the complainants and their relatives searched and shocked to see that, they were died near the garden of OP No.4 by electric shock are completely false and the complainants are put to strict proof of the same.  After the incident, a criminal case was registered against the OP No.4 in Hosadurga P.S under Crime No.216/2017 and after investigation, the Police have filed the charge sheet against the OP No.4 is true, but it is completely false to state that, the final report of the Police is clearly shows that, the deficiency of service is on the part of OP No.4.  It is further submitted that, the Hon’ble I Addl., District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga passed an order acquitting the OP No.4 in S.C.No.85/2018 (previously Crime No.216/2017) on 02.01.2019.  The averments made in para 6 of the complaint are completely false and concocted for the purpose of filing this complaint.  The averments made in para 7 of the complaint are not within the knowledge of this OP No.4 and the averments made in para 8 of the complaint are false and fictitious and the complainants are put to strict proof of the same.   The OP No.4 is no way concerned to the death of the said Thimmabhovi and Prithiviraj.  No doubt the said persons were died due to electrocution. Therefore, it is prayed for dismissal of the complaint against OP No.4. 

4.      The complainant No.1 has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-6 were got marked and closed their side.  On behalf of OP No.1 to 3 one Sri. Niranjanamurthy. H, the Assistant Executive Engineer has examined as DW-1 and Ex.B-1 document marked and OP N0.4 examined as DW-2  filing affidavit evidence and no  document has been got marked and closed their side.   

5.      Arguments heard.

6.      Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that:

1. Whether the complainants prove that, OPs have committed deficiency in service in maintaining the electrical line properly and they are responsible for the death of husband and son of the complainant No.1 by electrical shock and entitled for the relief as prayed for?

              (2) What order?

          7.      Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

                    Point No.1:- Partly in affirmative.

 

                    Point No.2:- As per final order.

 

REASONS

8.      Point No.1:-It is not in dispute that, on 03.10.2017 at about 8-00 AM, the husband and son of the complainant No.1 Thimmabhovi and Prithviraj were going to bring Banana leaves to the land of OP No.4 situated at Avalipalya village in Hosadurga Taluk.  By that time, the said persons were came in contact with the electric live wire which was laid to the fencing of the land of OP No.4 and died at the spot due to electrocution.  Immediately, the complainants have lodged a complaint before the concerned Police and the Police have registered a case against the OP No.4 and the complainants also intimated the same to OP No.1 to 3.  Due to the negligence act of OP No.1 to 3, the husband and son of the complainant No.1 died.  But, OP No.1 to 3 have denied that, they have not neglected in maintaning the electric line in the village.  But according to the OP No.1 to 3, the mistake is on the part of OP No.4, the death of husband and son of complainant No.1 is only due to negligence on the part of OP No.4 only. 

9.      It is argued by the Advocate for complainants that, the OP No.1 to 3 have not inspected and maintained the electric wire and they have not taken any care in maintaining the same to safeguard interest of the public at large.   No doubt, the deceased Thimmabhovi, aged about 48 years died due to electrical shock in the land of OP No.4 at Avalipalya village, Hosadurga Taluk.   The concerned Police have registered a case against the OP No.4.  The Hon'ble I Addl. District and Sessions Judge has passed an order in S.C. No.85/2018 acquitting  the OP No.4 in criminal case.  No doubt the death of above said persons is due to electrocution due to the negligence and deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1 to 3.  

10.    According to OP No.1 to 3, the mistake is committed by the OP No.4, not by OP No.1 to 3.  The arguments advanced by the OP No.4 Advocate that, the concerned Police have filed a charge sheet against OP No.4 and the same has been trialed before the Hon’ble I Additional District and Sessions Judge in S.C. No.85/2017 and the same has been disposed by acquitting the OP No.4.  Such being the case, the question of erection of electrical line un-authorizedly to the fencing of the land of OP No.4 does not arise.  No doubt, it is an admitted fact that, the husband of son of complainant No.1 died due to electrical shock near the land of OP No.4. 

11.   We have gone through the entire documents filed by the complainants and OPs.  After going through the documents it clearly shows that, on 03.10.2017, the husband and son of complainant No.1 by name Thimmabhovi and Prithviraj were died due to electrocution near the land of OP No.4.  The same has been intimated to the OPs.  The concerned Police have also inspected the spot and drawn mahazar.  The officer of OP No.1 to 3 have inspected the spot and drawn mahazar.  According to OP No.1 to 3, they have not committed any deficiency of service in maintaining the electrical wire and Advocate for OP No.1 to 3 has argued that, the mistake is only on the part of OP No.4 in erecting the electrical connection to his land.  Here the case is on hand that, anyhow, the OP No.1 to 4 have accepted that, the death is due to electrical shock.  As per the documents produced by the complainants and OPs, it clearly shows that, the deceased Thimmabhovi and Prithviraj were died due to electrical shock near the land of OP No.4 due to negligence in maintaining the electric line properly by the OP No.1 to 3. 

As per the available citations of I (2005) CPJ778in the case of N. KunchiBabu and another Vs. A.P. Transco Hyderabad and others, the Hon’ble National Commission has held that;

“Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Sections 2(1)(g), 14(1)(d) – electricity –wires touching balcony of house – minor daughter electrocuted, became physically disabled – failure to maintain minimum distance as per norms of Electricity Act -  deficiency in service proved – O.P. liable to pay compensation and medical expenses – cost awarded.

 As per the Citation of IV (2008) CPJ 139 (NC) in the case ofC.G.M., P & O, NPDCL&Ors Vs. KoppuDuddarajam and another wherein it has been held that;

“Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Sections 2(1)(d), 2(1)(g) and 14(1)(d) – Electricity – Electrocution – Live wire fell on deceased – Severe electrocution and spot death resulted – Villagers pay taxes to Village Panchayats and power consumption charges to electricity company, are consumers – Complainants being beneficiaries entitled to compensation – Complaint allowed by Forum – Order upheld in appeal – No interference required in revision.”

 

12.    Hence, the above citations of the Hon’ble Apex Court and Hon’ble National Commission are applicable to the case on hand and as per the above cited citations, the OP No.1 to 3 are liable for payment of compensation to the complainants.   

13.    Then the main question comes before the Forum is that, what is the quantum has to be paid to the complainants.  As per the documents produced by the complainants and as per the recent guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the persons succumbed to the electrocution whose age was 48 and 15 years respectively, they were doing agricultural work and a student and the family of the complainants is depending upon the earnings of the deceased Thimmabhovi.  On the basis of the guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, we would like to take notional income for a earning member is Rs.90,000/- p.a and age of the deceased earning member is 48 years and as per Sarala Varma’s citation of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the multiplier will comes to 13.  Then after deducting 1/3 of his income towards his personal expenses, the loss of love affection to the complainants from their son will be Rs.60,000 X 13 = Rs.7,80,000/-.  For the non-earning member, this Forum comes to the conclusion to award Rs.2,25,000/- as he is a student.  For the loss of love and affection by the complainants from family members, the award will be Rs.2,50,000/-.  So in all, the complainants are entitled to get for an amount of Rs.12,55,000/-.

 

14.    Hence, as discussed above in above paras, we come to the conclusion that, the complainants are entitled to get the compensation of Rs.12,55,000/- from OP No.1 to 3 along with interest as they have not taken precautionary measures to cover the live wire and made the deficiency in service in not taking proper steps to safe guard the public interest by allowing the OP No.4 to erect the electric wire to the fencing of his Banana garden.  Therefore, we come to the conclusion that, there is a deficiency of service on the part of OP No.1 to 3.  Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.    

  15.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

ORDER

The Complaint filed by the complainants U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is hereby partly allowed.

It is ordered that the OP No.1 to 3 are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.12,55,000/- to the complainants along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.   Out of the above said amount, the complainant No.1 and 2 are entitled for a sum of Rs.6,27,500/- each. 

It is further ordered that, the OP No.1 to 3 are hereby directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- each towards costs of this proceedings to the complainant No.1. 

Complaint as against OP No.4 is hereby dismissed.

It is further ordered that, the OP No.1 to 3 are hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

(This order is made with the consent of Members after the correction of the draft on 30/05/2019 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)         

 

                                     

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

 

PW-1:  ComplainantNo.1 by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

 

DW-1: Sri. Sri. Niranjanamurthy. H, the Assistant Executive Engineer, of OP No.1 by way of affidavit evidence.

 

DW-2: Sri.Kallesh, the OP No.4 by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	FIR
02	Ex-A-2:-	Charge Sheet
03	Ex-A-3:-	Spot Panchanama
04	Ex.A-4:	Spot sketch
05	Ex.A-5:-	Photos
06	Ex.A-6:-	P.M. report

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

01

Ex-B-1:-

Spot sketch

 

 

LADY MEMBER                     MEMBER                      PRESIDENT

Rhr**