Date : 13.03.2013.

Per Mrs.Uma S.Bora , Hon`ble Member.

1.       Chandrakala Kisan Dahale, resident of Khadkeshwar, Aurangabad original complainant No.1 preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation  granted by District Forum Aurangabad in C.C.No.510/2007.

2.       Facts in nutshell are as under.

          Complainants are agriculturists. They had obtained electric supply for electric motor situated on  their well since 1994. In the year 2001 there was road widening of Aurangabad-Mumbai road.  At that time electrical poles were removed by opponent MSEDCL.  Due to said removal electricity supply of complainant was disturbed. Even after completion of road widening poles were not erected by MSEDCL.  Complainant many times approached to opponent and asked erection of poles and regular supply of electricity. But said was not done. Therefore complainant approached to District Forum and demanded compensation .

3.       Opponent MSEDCL appeared before the Forum.  It is submitted by opponent that after completion of road widening supply was regularly given to the complainant.  Therefore there is no deficiency in service on the part of opponent.

4.       After hearing both the parties it is held by Forum that there is no proof of supply of electricity regularly to the complainant.  Therefore District Forum directed opponent MSEDCL to supply electricity within 30 days and to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation .

5.       Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation original complainant came in appeal.

6.       Adv.Shri.Bhushan Kulkarni appeared for appellant, none appeared for respondent.  We have heard Shri.Bhushan Kulkarni advocate of appellant.  It is submitted by Adv.Kulkarni that due to non-supply of electricity appellant could not irrigate his land.  Due to non-irrigation he could not get proper crop and suffered loss. It is submitted by Adv.Kulkarni that District Forum while considering the loss did not appreciate the pleading of the complainant. Therefore present appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation. 

7.       We perused the record and found that there is no evidence on record to show that which crops were taken by the complainant at the respective period  and how much loss complainant had suffered due to non-supply of electricity. It is also seen from the record that at present said land is converted in non-agriculture land. In our view in absence of any evidence about actual loss suffered by complainant there is no need of enhancing compensation.  Therefore appeal deserves to be dismissed. Hence,

                                                O   R    D    E    R

1.     Appeal is dismissed.

2.     No order as to cost.

3.     Copies of the judgment be issued to both the parties.

Pronounced on dt.13.03.2013