Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/26/2018

Smt Lalithamma, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Assistnat Executive Engineer, Operation and Maintenance - Opp.Party(s)

B. Ashok Kumar

03 Aug 2018

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:07/03/2018

DISPOSED      ON:03/08/2018

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

C.C.NO:26/2018

 

DATED: 3^rd AUGUST 2018

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

SMT.JYOTHIRADHESHJEMBAGI  : MEMBER

                        BSc., MBA., DHA.,

……COMPLAINANT/S	1. Smt. Lalithamma, W/o Late M. Swamy, Aged about 50 years, Agriculturist, R/o Devigere Village, Hosadurga Taluk, Chitradurga District.   2. Sri. Mallesha S/o Late M. Swamy, Aged about 24 years, Agriculturist, R/o Devigere Village, Hosadurga Taluk, Chitradurga District.   (Reptd. By Sri.B. Ashok Kumar, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Operation and Maintenance, Bescom, Rural sub Division, HosadurgaChitradurga District.   2. The Executive Engineer (Elec) Operation and Maintenance, Bescom, Chitradurga.   3. The Superintending Engineer (Elec), Operation and Maintenance, Bescom, Chitradurga.   4. Sri. Madhu, S/o Ramappa, Aged about 40 years, Agriculturist, R/o Devigere Village, Hosadurga Taluk, Chitradurga. District.   (Reptd. By Sri.T.K. Chandrasheekara Rao, Advocate for OP No.1 to 3 and Sri. M.C. Thippeswamy, , 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 18% p.a, Rs.50,000/- towards damages for physical and mental agony, Rs.10,000/- towards costs  and such other reliefs.  

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainants is that,they are the permanent residents of Devigere village, Hosadurga Taluk Chitradurga District.  OP No.1 to 3 are the service providers with respect to the electrical supply to the consumers and their duty bound is to take care of the safety measures to safeguard the interest of electricity users.  OP No.4 is also the resident of Devigere village, he is an agriculturist having land in the said village.  The land belongs to OP No.4 is situated adjacent to road and Sri Shambulingeshwara Temple of the said village.It is further submitted that, on 16.05.2017 the son of the complainant No.1Guruprasanna. S was moving near the above said Temple, the electric connection erected to the land of OP No.4 was laid down in the road due to negligence and non-maintenance of the OP No.1 to 3 and the said wire unfortunately touched to said Guruprasanna. S and electrocuted and succumbed to death on the spot.  After the incident, a criminal case was registered in Hosadurga Police under Crime No.173/2017 for negligence.  It is further submitted that, during his life time, the said Guruprasanna. S was doing egg rice center at Mavinakatte Gate, Hosadurga Taluk and earning monthly income of Rs.10,000/- from the said work and the complainants are depending on the earnings of the deceased Guruprasanna. S aged about 22 years.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 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 13.11.2017 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 Devigere 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. T.K. Chandrashekar Rao, Advocate and filed version on behalf of OP No.4one Sri.M.C. Thippeswamy, Advocate appeared and filed version. 

According to the version filed by OP No.1 to 3, they have admitted that, the death of Guruprasanna. S was due to electrocution near the land of OP No.4.  It is further stated that, OP No.1 to 3 are maintaining the electric line passed over the public place effectively with due care and the caution and well maintained the electrical lines duly inspecting and repairing the lines belonging to the BESCOM.  All the measures have taken to safeguard the life and property of the public and there is no negligence on their part.  OP No.4 is the resident of Devigere village having agricultural land is admitted.  Further it is submitted that, on 16.05.2017 the son of the complainant No.1Guruprasanna. S was moving near Sri Shambulingeshwara Temple, the OP No.4 erected the electric connection is not known to the OP No.1 to 3.  The other allegations made by the complainants in the complaint are denied as false, the complainants are put to strict proof of the same.  Devigere village is comes under the jurisdiction of OP No.1 to 3.  On 16.05.2017 at about 7-30 AM, the OP No. 1 has received information through Section Officer, BESCOM O & M-2, Hosadurga stating that one Guruprasanna. S S/o S.BSwamy, aged about 24 years died due to electric shock in the land fencing at Devigere village, Hosadurga Taluk.  OP No.1 along with Section Officer visited the spot immediately and found that said Guruprasanna. S found dead and the dead body was inside the fencing of land bearing sy. No.51/4 of Devigere village and it is found that, the electrical lines belongs to OP No.1 to 3 were perfectly in good condition, the lines were not cut down, fell down or snapped on any of the land fencing of the land.  It is also observed that, there was iron wire fencing surrounded the land bearing sy.No.51/4 to one Madhu S/o Ramappa on 25.03.1994 and on enquiry, it is learnt that, OP No.4 is illegally connected the live electric wire to the land fencing of sy.No.51/4 of Devigere village in odd hours of the night to early morning.  The complainants have also filed police complaint against OP No.4 causing death of Guruprasanna. S on account of electrocution on 16.05.2017 at about 7-30 AM before the Hosadurga Police.  Police have registered a case against the OP No.4 only in Crime No.172/2017 on the said date, and there was no allegation against OP No.1 to 3.  OP No.1 to 3 have also filed a complaint against OP No.4 before HosadurgaPolice on 20.05.2015 and the Police have registered a case in CR No.173/2017 u/Sc.304 r/w Sec. 149 IPC and 139 of Electricity Act 2003.  It is further submitted that, the electric lines passed through the land of farmers was perfectly maintained by supervising from time to time by the staff of OPs 1 to 3 and there was no complaint from any of the consumer or public in the area.  It is further submitted that, the OP No.4 illegally connected the live electric wire to the fencing of the land during night time and also in odd time with a malafide intention by violating the Electricity Acts and Rules.  After the incident, OP No.4 might have removed all the incriminating articles to suppress the evidence.  So, in the early hours of the day at 7-00 AM on 16.05.2017 the said Guruprasanna. S came in contact with the live electric fencing and died on the spot due to the illegal act of OP No.4, this could not be traced in routine inspection of the day by BESCOM.  It is further submitted that, all the police, statement of local people and report of electrical inspectorate reveals that, Sri Guruprasanna died due to electrocution while crossing the said fencing of the land and died on the spot and therefore, 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 16.05.2017 at 7-30 AM the deceased Guruprasanna was moving from Shambulingeshwara Temple and due to electrical shock he was died is not known to this OP No.4.  OP No.4 is residing at Chitradurga Town, he is not using any electrical connection to his land. His grand-father is having electric connection to his land.  Further it is denied that, the OP No.4 has not given electrical connection to the fencing and further it is stated that, the Hon’ble II Additional District and Sessions Judge in Special Case (SC/ST) No.40/2017 has passed an orders acquitting the OP No.4.  Such being the case, the question of erecting the electrical connection to the land does not arise.  The OP No.4 is no way concerned to the death of the said Guruprasanna. S.  No doubt the said Guruprasanna was died due to electrocution.Therefore, it is prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

4.      The complainanthas examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-8 were got marked and closed their side.  On behalf of OPNo.1 to 3 one Sri. H. ThirupathiNaik, Assistant Executive Engineer (Ele) has examined as DW-1 and Ex.B-1 to B-12 documents marked and OP N0.4 examined as DW-2  filing affidavit evidence and Ex.B-13 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 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 16.05.2017at about 7-30 PM, the son of the complainant No.1Guruprasanna. S was moving towards Shambulingeshwara Temple situated at Devigere village in Hosadurga Taluk.  By that time, the said Guruprasanna was touched the electric wire which was laid to the fencing of the land of OP No.4 and died at the spot due to electrocution.  Somebody has intimated the same to the complainants.  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 son of the complainant No.1 died.  But, OP No.1 to 3 have denied that, they have not neglected in installing 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 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 complainant that, the OP No.1 to 3 have not maintained the electric wire in the electric pole and they have not taken any care in maintaining the same.  No doubt, Guruprasanna S/o S.B. Swamy aged about 24 years died due to electrical shock in the land of OP No.4 at Devigere village, Hosadurga Taluk.  The OP No.1 to 3 have given the electric connection to the land of OP No.4.  The version filed by OP No.1 to 3 clearly shows that the line was passing to the land of OP No.4.  The grand-father of OP No.4 has obtained the electrical connection to his land.  Now the land stands in the name of OP No.4.  OP No.4 covered the entire land from fencing.  According to the OP No.4 he is residing in Chitradurga Town.  But the deceased Guruprasanna S died due to electrocution.  The concerned Police have registered a case against the OP No.4.  The Hon'ble II Addl. District Judge acquitted the OP No.1 in criminal case wherein it has been cited that, the OP No.1 to 3 have not properly maintained the electric line.  The wire was cut and fell down to the fencing of the land of OP No.4.  But the wire was not cut and fell at the incident place as alleged. The wire cut and fell on the fencing of the land bearing sy.No.51/4, it belongs to OP No.4.  But OP No.1 to 3 have not taken care of the said fallen wire.  When the deceased Guruprasanna S touche the fencing wire, he died due to electrocution at the spot 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 II Additional District and Sessions Judge in Special (SC/ST) case No.40/2017 and the same has been disposed by acquitting the OP No.4.  Such being the case, the question of erection of electrical line to the fencing of the land of OP No.4 does not arise.  No doubt, it is an admitted fact that, Guruprasanna. S was 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 16.05.2015, the son of complainant No.1 by name Guruprasanna. S was 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 installing the electrical wire and Advocate for OP No.1 to have 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 OPsclearly shows that, the deceased Guruprasanna. S was died due to electrical shock near the land of OP No.4.   due 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.1to 3are 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 complainantsand as per the recent guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the minor complainant was succumbed to the electrocution whose age was 24 years, he was doing egg rise centre to eke out livelihood and his family is depending upon his earnings.  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.89,640/- p.a and age of the injured is 24 years and as per SaralaVarma’s citation of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the multiplier will comes to 16.  Then after deducting 50% of his income towards his personal expenses, the loss of love affection to the complainantsfrom their son will be Rs.44,820 X 16 X 1 = Rs.7,17,120/-.  The complainants have not produced any document towards medical and travelling charges.  Even though if they have not produced bills or documents it is on safer side to award Rs.70,000/- towards medical and travelling charges including funeral expenses is to be ordered.  So in all, the complainant is entitled to get for an amount of Rs.7.87,120/- as mentioned below.”

Towards loss of love and affection	Rs.7,17,120-00
Towards mental agony, travelling, and funeral expenses	Rs.   70,000-00
Total	Rs.7,87,120-00

 

Hence, as discussed above in above paras, we come to the conclusion that, the complainants are entitled to get the compensation of Rs.7,87,120/- 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.  Therefore, we come to the conclusion that, there is a deficiency of service on the part of OP No.1to 3.  Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.    

  14.     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 complainant 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.7,17,120/- to the complainants along with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of incident i.e., 16.05.2017 till realization.

It is further ordered that, the OP No.1 to 3 are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.70,000/- towards the mental agony, funeral expenses and transportation expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainants. 

The complaint filed as against OP No.4 is hereby dismissed.

It is ordered that, the OPNo.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 Member after the correction of the draft on 03/08/2018 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.H. Tirupathi, AEE of OP No.1 by way of affidavit evidence.

 

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

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Legal Notice dated 13.11.2017
02	Ex-A-2:-	4 Postal receipts
03	Ex-A-3:-	Returned postal cover with acknowledgement
04	Ex.A-4:	2 Postal Acknowledgements
05	Ex.A-5:-	Election ID card of complainant N.1
06	Ex.A-6:-	Election ID card of Guruprasanna. S
07	Ex.A-7:-	Election ID card of complainant N.1
08	Ex.A-8:-	Ration Card belongs to complainant No.1

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

01	Ex-B-1:-	Letter dated 16.05.2017 by OP No.1
02	Ex-B-2:-	Statement of TirupatiNaik
03	Ex-B-3:-	Statement of Section Officer
04	Ex.B-4:	Form-A
05	Ex.B-5:-	Letter by Section Officer to PSI
06	Ex.A-6:-	R of R
07	Ex.A-7:-	FIR
08	Ex.A-8:-	Statement of Complainant No.1
09	Ex.A-9:-	Statement of Complainant No.1
10	Ex.A-10:-	PM report
11	Ex.A-11:-	Letter dated 19.07.2017 by Electrical Inspectorate, Davanagere
12	Ex.A-12:-	Spot sketch
13	Ex.A-13	Judgment copy in Special C (SC/ST) No.40/2017

 

 

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

Rhr**