::BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AT BIDAR::
C.C. No.02/2018.
Date of filing: 11.01.2018.
Date of disposal: 20.06.2018.
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. Vishwanath S/o Veerbhadrappa Biradar,
Age:50 years, Occ: Agriculture and Milk Vendor,
R/o village Hippalgaon Tq and Dist: Bidar.
( By Sri.Shivaraj.G. Biradar., Adv.)
VERSUS
OPPONENT/S: 1) The Managing Director, Gulbarga Electricity
Supply Company Ltd., Kalaburagi.
2) The Executive Engineer (El) Gulbarga Electricity
Supply Company Ltd., Bidar Division Bidar.
3) The Assistant Executive Engineer (El) Gulbarga
Electricity Supply Company Ltd. Bidar Sub-
Division, Bidar.
4) The Section Officer (El) Gulbarga Electricity
Supply Company Ltd., Section Office Janwada
Tq and Dist: Bidar.
(By. Santosh .V.Bargale., Adv.)
:: J UD G M E N T ::
By Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata, President.
The complainant has approached this Forum by filing a complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, seeking compensation from the opponents. The sum total of the complaint is as hereunder.
2. That, the complainant, resident of village Hippalgaon, Tq/Dist- Bidar is an agriculturist and milk vendor. He was owner of a she buffalo worth Rs.90,000/- which was yielding 15 litres of milk every day. The said buffalo died due to electrocution. The complainant further avers that, he was cultivating land bearing Sy.No.94 of Hippalgaon village, belonging to one Basawaraj S/o Channabasappa Biradar on crop sharing basis.
3. That, on 10.11.2017 in the morning, the complainant led the she buffalo for grazing and about 12 Noon heard loud crying of the buffalo. Rushing to the spot, he found that, snapped electric live wires from the pole had fallen to the ground, was rolled and tied to the pole. Currents from the live wire were spread around the ground nearby where the buffalo was grazing and resultantly the animal was electrocuted and died due to shock. He had informed the jurisdictional Janawada Police Station, who registered the case, came to spot and panchanama was drawn. Further the buffalo was subjected to postmortem examination and the veterinarian had opined the cause of death as electrocution.
4. The complainant claims that, the electrocution and resultant death of his she buffalo was due to the negligency and deficiency of service in the part of the line staffs of the opponents. They were informed about the snapped live electrical wire much earlier but have not attended to the complaint. The complainant further claims, his animal was seven years old, quite healthy, milching and its’ death caused enormous loss to him, he has claimed a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. The complainant further claims, he has served legal notices to the opponents to no avail for which he has filed the present complaint.
5. The opponents on receipt of notice have appeared through Counsel. O.P.No.2 had filed the written versions and the rest have adopted the same. In the versions, the O.P.s have seriously disputed the contentions of the complainant. The fact of ownership, its’ milk yielding and price of the she buffalo has been challenged. The fact of cultivating land in Sy.No.94 of Hippalgaon village of Basawaraj is also disputed. The fact of death of the she buffalo is denied as electrocution death, so also the snapping of live electric wire. It is further avered that, the complainant himself was negligent and had left the she buffalo to graze in improper manner and has not taken care. The fact of registration of the Police case is alleged to have taken place at the instance of the complainant so also the Postmortem examination. The opponents also canvass that, none had informed them about the snapping of the electrical wire and the allegation is bogus. The alleged she buffalo was aged one and not yielding milk. The O.P.s further canvass that, there was no negligency or deficiency of service in the part of the O.P.s and they are not obliged to pay any compensation. It is claimed that, reply to legal notice of the complainant was done. (No copy submitted). Further that, the complainant has never approached the O.P.s for compensation. (sic-whats the meaning of the legal notice then?) It is further avered that, the complainant was not cultivating any land on crop share basis and he was only an agriculture laborer. He is not a consumer of the GESCOM a hence is not entitled to pursue the present complaint. On the grounds mentioned supra, the O.P.s pray for dismissal of the case with costs.
6. The complainant has submitted documents as described at the end of this order, excluding himself, has examined two other witnesses by name Basawaraj and Shankar Rao. The O.P.s have examined, Sri Basawaraj, Executive Engineer, GESCOM, Bidar as their witness. Both sides have filed written arguments trying to justify their cases.
7. Taking into consideration the diametrically opposite canvassments of the parties, the following points arise for our consideration.
- Is the complainant competent to maintain the present complaint?
- Does the O.P.s prove that, there has been no negligency or deficiency of service in maintaining the power transmission lines?
- What orders?
8. Our answers to the arisen points are as following:-
- In the affirmative.
- In the negative.
- As per final orders owing to the following:-
:: REASONS ::
9. Point (1): The opponents have vehemently canvassed before us that, the complainant is not competent to maintain the present case, not being a consumer. The complainant vide Annexures-S and T has submitted Panchayath documents assessing tax of his house and the tax payment. In the case of CGM, P & O NFDCL and ors v/s Koppu Duddarajan and ors reported in IV (2008) CPJ 139 (NC), The Hon’ble National Commission has held that.
“Villagers pay taxes to village Panchayath and power Consumption charges to electrical companies and hence they are consumers”.
10. Additionally, the complainant has submitted before us an order of this Forum in C.C.No.2/2009 (D.D.09.10.2009) in which the case under similar circumstances was decided in favour of the complainant. An appeal was preferred by the complainant before the State commission vide Appeal No.420/2010 (D.D.19.11.2010) in which, not only the reasoning’s of this forum was upheld but also the award amount was enhanced. The things be so, we accept the pleadings of the complainant, overrule the objections of the opponents and answer the point No.1 in the affirmative.
11. Point No(2): To substantiate the fact of the electrical accident, the complainant has produced number of documents. Annexure-A is a certified copy of the police complaint submitted to Bidar Rural Police Station, Dist:, Bidar basing on which F.A.No.10/2017 was registered and vide Annexure-B spot Panchanama was drawn on 11.11.2017. In the said Panchanama, panchas have stated about the electrical wire snapped from the pole and lying at the base of the pole, and caused the land surrounding electrocuted. The same is also corroborated by the witness in his statements before the police vide annexure-C. The Veterinarian conducting post-mortem has opined cause of death may be due to electrical shock in Annexure-E. However, documents produced vide Annexure-J to Q (‘j’ and‘o’ excluded) color photos of the spot clearly depict the position of the dead animal proximate to the electrical pole and fallen electrical wires on the ground thus proving the negligence of the opponents in maintaining power transmission line.
12. The Hon’ble National commission in the case reported in III (2010) CPJ-198 (NC) DHCVNL v/s Vidya devi has been pleased to hold that.
“Electric Co.s transmitting energy are duty bound to maintain and ensure safety and security of persons, animals and other objects and when exposed wires cause damages, the service provider to compensate losses”. The same was reiterated in another recent case 2016 (1) CPR-260 (N.C.). Hence taking a cue from the decisions of the higher fora, we answer the point No.2 accordingly.
13. Point (3): In the instant case, the complainant has claimed the price of the dead buffalo as Rs.90,000/- by producing the purchase receipt at Annexure-H and has sought an award of Rs.2,00,000/- towards cost and damages. We in fer, the claim to be exaggerated. In decisions reported in 2008 CTJ-561 (SC) and 2009 CTJ-535 (NC) it has been held that,
“Consumer court can award compensation for deficiency of service. For recovery of loss, complainant has to approach a civil Court”. We are in respectful agreement with the ratio as afore said and have to confine ourselves on the cost price of the dead buffalo.
14. Herein, though the complainant has submitted a money receipt (Annexure-H) depicting the price of the animal as Rs.90,000/-, the Veterinarian in P.M. report (annexure-E) has assessed the market value at Rs.80,000/-. In cases reported in 2013 (1) CPR-510 (NC) and III (2013)CPJ-377, the Hon’ble National Commission has mandated that, the cost estimated by the Veterinary doctor has to be reckoned. Thereby we have to proceed further basing on the cost of the animal at Rs.80,000/-.
15. The most tricky question still lies to be answered as to what would be the just award? The complainant inPara-5 of the complaint has asserted that, the line staff of the opponent company were informed about the snapped wire. This assertion ipso facto means the complainant was also aware of the danger waiting ahead inspite of which he let the poor animal approaching the live wire. This act of the complainant can certainly not be appreciated and hence we in-fer that, there is an element of contributory negligence in his misconduct. Therefore, we hold that, portion of his negligence be confined to 30% and from the cost of the buffalo, the same be deducted, and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER.
- The complaint is allowed in part.
- The opponents are jointly and severally directed to pay a sum of Rs.56,000/-as compensation to the complainant with interest @ 12% p.a calculated from the date of filing of the case till realisation.
- There would be no orders towards damages and litigation costs,
- Four weeks time granted to comply this order.
(Typed to our dictation then corrected, signed by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 20th day of June 2018).
Sri. Shankrappa H. Sri. Jagannath Prasad
Member. President.
Documents produced by the complainant
- Annexure.A-Certified copy of complaint and FIR in
F.A.No.10/2017 of Rural Police Station Bidar. - Annexure.B–Certified copy of Spot Panchanama in F.A.
No.10/2017 of the above Police Station. - Annexure. C– Certified copy of witness statement of Sri. Basawaraj
in the above case. - Annexure.D—Certified copy of report sent to Tahasildar cum Taluk
executive Magistrate Bidar in the above of case. - Annexure. E– Certified copy of post-mortem report.
- Annexure.F- Copy of Aadhar Card of the complainant.
- Annexure.G- Member ship certificate issued by Heritage foods
limited Bidar. - Annexure.H- Original cash receipt of Buffalo purchase.
- Annexure.J to Q- Colour Photographs of scene of occurance.
- Annexure.R- office copy of legal notice.
- Annexure.Sto V- Postal receipts.
- Annexure.W- Copy of Khata certificate issued by Chambol Gram
Panchayat. - Annexure.X- Copy of Tax receipt.
Document produced by the Opponents.
-Nil-
Witness examined.
Complainant.
- P.W.1- Vishwanath S/o Veerbhadrappa Biradar (complainant).
- P.W.2- Basawaraj S/o Chanabasappa Biradar village Hippalgao Tq
and Dist: Bidar.
- P.W.3- Shankarao S/o sangappa Tulajapure Village Hippalagao Tq
and Dist: Bidar.
Opponent No.1
- R.W.1- Sri. Basawaraj S/o Apparao Patil Executive Engineer GESCOM Bidar.
Sri. Shankrappa H. Sri. Jagannath Prasad
Member. President.
