::BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES  REDRESSAL FORUM, AT BIDAR::

                                                               C.C. No.48/2017.

                                                            Date of filing: 05.08.2017.

                                                                   Date of disposal: 07.07.2018.

P R E S E N T:-    

                              (1) Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata,                                                                                                                                                                                                      B.A., LL.B.,

                                                                                                President

                             (2) Shri. Shankrappa (Halipurgi),

                                                                                 B.A.LL.B.,

                                                                                           Member.

COMPLAINANT/S:    1.   Smt.Jagadevi W/o Nagashetty @ Naganna @
                                            Nagnath , Age:Major, Occ:House Hold,

                                            R/o H.No.74, Manna-e-Khelli

                                           Tq:Humnabad  Dist: Bidar                                                 

                                       2.       Deelip S/o Nagashetty @ Naganna @ Nagnath ,

                                                  Age: Major,Occ: Private Service,

                                                  R/o H.No.74 Manna-e-khelli

                                                  Tq:Humnabad, Dist: Bidar.                                     

                                       ( By Sri.Sanjaykumar. S.Patil., Adv.)                                   

                                                                 VERSUS

OPPONENT/S:        1)         The Assistant Executive Engineer,

(Electrical), O & M, Sub-Division, GESCOM           
            Mannekhelli, Tq:Humnabad, Dist: Bidar.                                          

                                           (By. Sri.Mahesh.S.Patil., Adv.)

::   J UD G M E N T  ::

By Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata, President.

The complainants mother and son duo are before us filing complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, seeking compensation from the solo O.P. on account of the death of one Nagashetty, the husband of the 1^st complainant and father of 2^nd one.  Both claim to be the consumers under the O.P. and have filed electricity bills and issued in the name of one late Bheemanna father of deceased.  They have also submitted a Geneological tree proving their entitlements to the estate of late Bheemanna and substantiating further the fact that, they are legal heirs of deceased Nagashetty.  Their pleadings in the complaint are here under.

2.           That Late Nagashetty @ Naganna @ Nagnath a resident of Village Manna-e-khelli, Tq: Humnabad Dist: Bidar was about 50 years of age, sole bread earner of the family, was earning an in came of Rs.20,000/- to Rs.30,000/-.  From cultivation, he was further getting an income of Rs.50,000/- p.a..

3.          On 28.08.2016, took his buffalo for grazing at about 4 p.m. and in the process by about 5.35 p.m. reached in front of the house of Nyamatha Bambalagi at khajae Majid Colony of Manna-e-khelli village.  He was found dead proximate to the G-wire affixed to the electrical pole affixed at the open space, where the buffalo was grazing.  Electricity current was flowing through such G-wire to the ground and resultantly the deceased got a massive electrical shock and died.  The complainant lodged a police complaint in the jurisdictional Manna-e-khelli Police Station, U.D.R. No.11/2016 got registered.  (Annexure-A).  As a corollary, case was investigated by the Police (Annexure-B) and the body was subjected to post mortem.  (Annexure-C).  The cause of death has been found out as ‘due to sudden cardio respiratory arrest secondary to shock due to electrocution”.

 4.        The complainants had lodged a claim of compensation with the O.P. on 31.05.2017 (Annexure-D) to no avail.  Rather a perfunctory letter got emanated from the Executive Engineer, GESCOM, Bidar on the same day picturising the electrical shock due to internal wiring problems, (annexure-E).  Therefore, alleging deficiency of service in the part of the O.P., they have filed this complaint.  The jurisdictional, Police has later filed a final report in the case, (Annexure-F).

5.         The opponent entering into appearance through counsel, has filed elaborate written versions, in which it is claimed that, the complaint is false, baseless and devoid of merit.  The relationships of the complainants with the deceased is not known to the O.P. or else the fact of land holding and cultivator status of the deceased.  The allegation of the deceased being subjected to electrocution and death is also denied by the O.P..  It is further avered that, the electrocution did not take place near the house of Nyamath Bambulgi, rather it is canvassed that, he got electrocuted touching the internal wirings and the clever complainant had made up the case by manipulations.  The income status of the deceased is highly disputed so also the complainants entitlement in a sum of Rs.4,50,000/-.

6.         The O.P. admits about receiving a claim notice from the complainants and that it was suitably replied, the O.P. has further in the versions disputed the status of complainants as consumers under him and prays dismissal of the case as not due.

7.         In the case, only complainant has filed documents, both sides have submitted evidence affidavits.  The complainant further has filed written arguments, while the O.P. filing a memo has urged to consider the contents of Versions as his written arguments.  In furtherance, both sides were heard in length.

8.         Taking into account the juxtaposed canvassments of the parties concerned, the following points rise for our considerations.

1. Do the complainants prove that, they are consumers under the O.P.?
2. Do the complainants further prove that, the electrocution death occurred due to negligency and deficiency of service in the part of the O.P.?
3. Dies the O.P. prove that the electrocution death had occurred due to touching of the internal wirings?
4. What orders?

9.         Our answers to the points raised are as following:-

1. In the affirmative.
2. In the affirmative.
3. In the negative.
4. As per final orders owing to the following:-

:: REASONS ::

10.       Point (1): Dealing with the challenge of the O.P. regarding the complainants status as consumers, the laters have submitted original Annexure-J and Annexure-K to substantiate their status as consumers as well as their entitlements to the estate of deceased Nagashetty and his Late father Bheemanna.  Annexure-J is an electricity bill, showing Bheemanna and another Mallappa Kumbhar as consumers in respect of Metre No.M824 in Lt-2(a)(11) category.  Undoubtedly, after demise of such Bheemanna (Bhimanna), his late son Nagashetty @ Naganna @ Naganath became the beneficiary and after his death due to electrocution the present complainants have stepped into his shooes.  Annexure-K amply proves their status as legal heir to the deceased and we have no hesitations to hold that, the complainants are consumers and hence we answer the point accordingly.

11.       Point No(2) & (3): Both these points are to be dealt simultaneously being interwoven.  Contrary to the tall claim of the O.P. that, the deceased got electrical shock from the internal wiring, no cogent evidence has been led to that effect.  Per contra, the complainants submitting umpteen numbers of public documents vide Annexure-A to F have amply proven that, the deceased got electrocuted from the energy spreading to the ground through the G. wire attached to the pole in front of the house of Nyamath a of the same village.  Albeit, the O.P. vociferously claim that, the documents were concocted by the complainants, we are not inclined to accept the holier than thou attitude of the O.P..  After all, what was preventing the O.P. to participate in 174 (2) Cr. P.C. Police proceedings and put forward his points?  The ostrich like attitude certainly does not augur well for a state instrumentality therefore, we answer the points No.2 and 3 accordingly. 

12.       Point (4):       A tragic death of an able bodied family man has occurred.  Though his age is claimed as 50 years, from the P.M. report, the same appears to be 55 years.  No evidence towards his claimed in come @ Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/- p.m. has been led before us, nor his annual income @ Rs.50,000/- from agricultural operations.  In the absence of any credible evidence, we have to consider his income as an unskilled labourer.           

13.       To determine the monthly income of daily wage unskilled labourers, we have to take reference from the Government notifications from time to time.  Recently, this office has interacted with Secretary, Bidar District services of Labour.  Multipurpose Co. Operative Society to hire services of a sanitary worker.  The Secretary, forwarding a copy of Government Notification No.KAE 71 LWA 2015 date: 01.08.2016 has shown us the stipulated wage of an unskilled worker as Rs.11806/- i.e. Rs.10725 + VDA rs.1081/-.  So the same has to be applied to determine the monthly income of the deceased.  Out of Rs.11806/- wage, hypothetically, he must be spending 1/3 personally, which would be roughly a sum of Rs.3936/-.  Hence the balance of Rs.7270/- would be considered his contribution to the family P.M..  Attempting to fix the multiplier, we would refer to the case law rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Varma v/s Delhi Transport Corpn. And Anr., reported in MANU/SC/0666/2009 which prescribes that, in case of a person in the age group of 51 to 55 years the multiplier adopted to be 9.  Hence the net entitlements of the complainants would arrieve at RS.8,49,960/- to which conventional other reliefs to be added like loss of consortium etc.  which would be
 Rs.20,000/-.  In the instant case but the complainants have claimed a global compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- and hence we are confining ourselves to the quantum of compensation claimed and proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER.

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. The O.P. is hereby directed to  pay a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- as compensation towards the loss of life of late Nagashetty;
3. The compensation amount would be paid to complainants in equal proportions.
4. The amounts awarded above be paid within four weeks of this order.

(Typed to our dictation then corrected, signed by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 07^th  day of July 2018).

Sri. Shankrappa H.                                             Sri. Jagannath Prasad                                  

Member.                                                                President.                                                                                       

Documents produced by the complainant

1. Annexure.A-F.I.R. in U.D.R. No.11/2016 of Mannaekhelli Police
                         Station.
2. Annexure.B– Inquest report in U.D.R. No.11/2016.
3. Annexure. C– Post-mortem report in U.D.R. No.11/2016.
4. Annexure.D—Copy of application claiming compensation from the
                            O.P.date:14.02.2017.
5. Annexure. E– Copy of letter No. ©ÃzÀgÀ/C.C/PÁ.¤.EA(PÀ)/¸À.PÁ.¤EA/PÀ-36/2017-
                    18/1013-17 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 31.05.2017.
6. Annexure.F- Copy of final report in U.D.R. No.11/2016 of
                           Mannaekhelli Police Station district Bidar.
7. Annexure.G- Copy of letter of A.E.E. Electrical Mannaekhelli
                            date:01.10.2016.
8. Annexure.H- Copy of conformation report of telephone message
                            date:29.08.2016.
9. Annexure.J – Original electricity bill.
10. Annexure.K- Original §£ÁìªÀ½ ¥ÀvÀæ.

 Document produced by the Opponents.

-Nil-

Witness examined.

Complainant.

1. P.W.1- Smt.Jagadevi W/o Nagashetty (complainant No.1).

Opponent.

1. R.W.1-  Sri.Suryakanth P.H.S/o Pandurang Rao Assistant Executive Engineer Humnabad Division Humnabad.

Sri. Shankrappa H.                                             Sri. Jagannath Prasad                                  

       Member.                                                                      President.