Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/22/2015

Hanumanthappa K.H. S/o. Horakerappa - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Section Officer, Chikajajur Section, BESCOM - Opp.Party(s)

Shri.G.Chandrashekarappa

30 Jul 2015

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON : 10/02/2015

     DISPOSED ON: 30/07/2015

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA

 

CC. NO. 22/2015 DATED: 30th July 2015

 

PRESENT :-     SRI.V.H.RAMACHANDRA PRESIDENT                                      B.A., LL.B.,

                        SRI.H.RAMASWAMY                MEMBER

                                B.Com., LL.B.,(Spl.)

                        SMT.G.E.SOWBHAGYALAKSHMI    

                                 B.A., LL.B.,                  MEMBER

                               

COMPLAINANT	1. Hanumanthappa K.H,     S/o Horakerappa.   2. Smt. Nagarathnamma,     W/o Hanumanthappa,        Both are R/o     Kallavvanagathihalli village     Tal: Holalkere,     Dist: Chitradurga.   (Rep by Sri. G.Chandrashekharappa,  Advocate)
OPPOSITE PARTY	1. The Section Officer,     Chikkajajur Section,     BESCOM, Chikkajajur,     Tal: Holalkere.   2. The Asst. Executive     Engineer,     Holalkere Va Ka and Pa      Division Office, BESCOM,     Holalkere Town.    3. The Executive Engineer,      BESCOM, Behind D.C.    Office, Chitradurga.   (Rep by Smt. T.K. Champa, Advocate)

 

SRI.V.H.RAMACHANDRA, MEMBER.

ORDER

 

The above said complaint has been filed by the complainants 1 and 2 U/s 12 of C.P. Act 1986 for the relief to direct the Opposite parties to pay Rs. 4,60,000/- with costs and interest etc. 

 

2.     The brief facts of the case is that, they are father and mother of deceased K.H. Manjunath (hereinafter called deceased).  It is further stated that the complainants 1 and 2 and their son were permanent residents of Kallavanagtihalli village in Holalkere Taluk of Chitradurga District and they own some agricultural land and obtained the electricity connection from OPs.  It is also stated that, on 19.09.2013 at 4-30 PM, when deceased Manjunath had been to grazing his cattle towards B-Durga village and when reached the land of Ramesh S/o Murugendrappa of B-Durga he came in contact with electrical live wire which was lying on the land and died due to electrocution.  On coming to know about the incident it was informed to the Police and body of the deceased was taken to the PHC of B-Durga and after postmortem it was brought by the complainants and funeral was done by spending amount of Rs.1,00,000/-.  It is further stated that, the electric line was drawn by the OPs and the electrical wires drawn in Kallavvanagtihalli  and B-Durga are all old one and since two years they were in lying condition and in spite of people of the locality have complained to the OPs but they have not corrected or changed the said old wires.  So due to the negligence of the OPs, incident has occurred and deceased died due to electrocution.  It is also stated that,  on receipt of the complaint, Police of Chikkajajur have registered the case under UDR No.27/2013 and after following all the formalities like drawing Panchanama, recording of statements etc., they have handed over the dead body to the complainants.  It is also stated that, during his life time deceased was ail and healthy and was aged about 21 years and completed D.Ed., with A-Grade and applied for the Government Job and also continuing his education in BA and doing agricultural work also and due to his untimely death complainants have lost their earning member and son and so they have sustained financial loss and mental agony.  Since due to the negligence of OPs this incident has occurred.  They have made a claim and OPs have paid the amount of Rs.3,40,000/- only and agreed to pay remaining amount of Rs.4,60,000/- and in spite of repeated demands and requests not paid the same and so, OPs have committed deficiency of service and negligence and etc., and prayed for allow the complaint. 

 

   3. On service of notice, OPs 1 to 3 have appeared through Sri. T.K. Champa, Advocate and filed version of OP 3 and adopted the same by OPs 1 and 2 by filing a memo.  In the objections/version, OPs have contended that they have denied the contents of para-2 and 3 of complaint as false. It is further stated that the contents of para-4, 5,6 and 7 are denied as false.  However, OPs have admitted the said incident and payment of Rs.3,40,000/- to the complainants on compensate ground.  It is further stated that, there is no deficiency of service on the part of OPs and deceased died du to his own negligence and denied the liability to pay any amount to the complainants. 

 

 4. Complainant No.2 Smt. Nagarathnamma herself examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and got marked Ex A-1 to A-8.

 

        5. OPs have examined one Sri. B.S. Jagadeesh, Executive Engineer of BESCOM, Chitradurga as DW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and no documents are got marked.  

       

6. Arguments heard.

 

7. Now the Points that arise for our consideration for the decision of the complaint are that:

Point No.1:- Whether the complainants prove that, on 19.09.2013 at about 4-30 PM, when their son deceased K.H. Manjunath had been to grazing his cattle towards B-Durga and when reached the land of one Ramesh S/o Murugendrappa, deceased came in contact with the cut live electrical wires drawn by the OPs and died by electrocution and the said incident has occurred due to the negligence of OPs in maintaining the electrical line and thereby they sustained financial loss and mental agony and OPs have committed deficiency of service and entitled for the relief as prayed for in the complaint?

 

Point No.2:- What order?

 

        8. Our findings on the above points are as follows:

 

        Point No.1:- Partly affirmative.

        Point No.2:- As per the final order.

 

                                ::REASONS::

       9. Point No. 1:- It is the case of the complainants that, they are the father and mother of deceased K.H. Manjunath and on 19.09.2013 deceased had been to grazing his cattle towards the land of Ramesh S/o Murugendrappa of B-Durga village and accidentally he came in contact with the live electric wire lying on the land and died by electrocution.  After the incident it was informed to the OPs and also to the Police and Police have came and drawn Panchanama and send the body to the Postmortem and registered the case in UDR No.27/2013 by Chikkajajur Police and thereafter funeral was done by spending the huge amount.  It is also stated that, during his life time deceased has completed D.Ed., in A-grade and also continuing his education in BA and applied for Government job.  He was doing agricultural work and grazing the cattle and earning Rs.1,50,000/- p.a after deducting the expenses and complainants have been depending upon his earnings and due to untimely death complainants have lost their source of income.  It is also admitted that, OPs have paid the amount of Rs.3,40,000/- and agreed to pay the remaining amount totally Rs.8,00,000/- and so, OPs have committed deficiency of service and prayed for allow the complaint. 

10.  In support of their case, complainants have relied on the affidavit evidence of complainant No.2 in which she has reiterated the contents of Complaint and documents like true copies of FIR, complaint, Spotmahazar, inquest mahazar, statement of Ramesh, Manjunath, UDR report and PM report are marked as Ex.A-1 to A-8.  On perusal of Ex.A-7 UDR report and Ex.A-8 Postmortem report clearly shows deceased Manjunath died by electrocution.  So, it leads to the conclusion that, deceased Manjunath is the son of the complainants who died by electrocution.  Various police reports are also showing the electric live wire was lying on the land and deceased came in contact with the same and died by electrocution.  On the other hand, OPs have denied the entire allegations made in the complaint and OPs have denied the liability to pay any amount.  However, they have admitted that the deceased died by electrocution and on humanitarian ground an amount of Rs.3,44,000/- has been paid to the complainants and so it was fully settled and not liable to pay any amount and so OPs have not committed any deficiency of service and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

11.  In support of their contentions, OPs have relied on the affidavit evidence of OP 3, P.S. Jagadeesh, Executive Engineer, he has reiterated the contents of version and filed the Xerox copies of order for payment of compensation to the complainants dated 08.01.2014 and copy of cheque dated 18.03.2014 for Rs. 3,44,000/- of Canara Bank, Chitradurga and copy of passbook in the name of complainant No.1 and it shows the said amount of Rs.3,44,000/- has been credited to his account towards compensation.  Xerox copy of ration card, survival certificate are also filed.  On perusal of the same, it shows the complainants the complainants 1 and 2 are the father and mother of deceased K.H. Manjunath and the deceased was the son of complainants aged about 21 years and since they are Xerox copies and they have not been marked. 

12.  On the basis of above said affidavit evidence and documentary evidence it is the contentions of Sri. G.Chandrashekarappa, Advocate for the complainants and he was doing agricultural work and also pursuing his education and likely to get a job in Government Departments.  He was also doing agricultural work and grazing cattle and earning Rs.1,50,000/- p.a and due to untimely death by electrocution complainants have lost their earning member in the family which caused financial loss, mental agony.  It is also contended that, in spite of several complaints to the OPs they have not changed the old electric wires and due to their negligence, live electric wire was lying on the land and deceased accidentally came in contact with the same and died by electrocution.  Of course death of the deceased is proved by documentary evidence like Ex.A-7 and A-8.  It is also contended that, OPs have paid the amount of Rs.3,44,000/- by cheque and it has been credited but they have not paid the remaining amount as agreed for Rs.8,00,000/- and so OPs have committed deficiency of service. 

13.  On the other hand, Smt. T.K. Champa, Advocate for the OPs has strongly resisted the said contentions stating that, due to natural calamities by heavy wind and rain, electric wire was cut and lying on the land and so OPs are not liable to pay any amount and in spite of that, on humanitarian ground paid an amount of Rs.3,44,000/- by cheque to the complainants and since they have paid the entire amount as compensation and so, complaint itself is not maintainable and etc., and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

14.  On hearing the rival contentions of both the sides and careful perusal of the entire records, it is proved that, deceased Manjunath is the son of complainants 1 and 2 and he was aged about 21 years and doing his education in D.Ed., and BA and due to his untimely death complainants have suffered financial loss and mental agony.  Of course, it is true that, deceased Manjunath was aged about 21 years and still unmarried.  On the basis of Police report especially Ex.A-7 and A-8 it is proved that, deceased died by electrocution.  So, it goes to show that, OPs have neglected to maintain the electric line properly and therefore, they have committed deficiency of service and due to their negligence, Manjunath died by electrocution.  The next point will arise regarding claim of compensation.  Ex.A-8 shows deceased was aged about 21 years and since he was still unmarried and therefore, for the purpose of multiplier age of the parents have to be taken into consideration.  In support of his contentions, Sri. G.Chandrashkarappa, Advocate for the complainant has relied on the following decision. 

 

ILR 2015 KAR 21

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 173(1) – Appeals by the Owner and Insurer – Findings of negligence and quantum of compensation – Selection of multiplier – HELD, The question of dependency which is of utmost importance and grant of compensation under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, is a concept based on the dependency. – When the concept of compensation under the social welfare legislation is the dependency, it is the extent of the dependency of the parents that would weigh much to grant the benefit of the income of deceased and that is most relevant – It is the age of the parents which has to be considered in choosing the multiplier and not the age of the deceased – Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in choosing the multiplier on the basis of the age of the youngest amongst the parents.  Compensation is enhanced.   

 

       15.  In view of the above cited decision, the age of the mother i.e., Complainant No.2 has to be taken into consideration and as per the copy of ration card her age was 41 years.  So, proper multiplier applicable is 14.  Admittedly, she is an agriculturist and doing household work.  Deceased was doing agricultural work and there is no document to show his income.  Therefore, it is just and proper to take net income at Rs.2,000/- p.m after deducting 50% towards his personal expenses, Rs.2,000/- x 12, it comes to Rs.24,000/- p.a and since the multiplier applicable is 14, so, 24,000 x 14 comes to Rs.3,34,000/-.  Complainants are entitled for Rs.3,36,000/- as compensation along with that, above said documents are also showing complainants have took the body of deceased to the Hospital and after postmortem taken to the village and funeral was done so, under the head of transportation, they are entitled for Rs.10,000/- and under the head funeral Rs.10,000/- and towards costs of the proceedings Rs.10,000/- so, totally complainants are entitled for Rs.3,61,000/-.  Admittedly, complainants have received the amount of Rs.3,44,000/- as evident from the copy of cheque and passbook entries.  So, after deducting Rs.3,44,000/- it comes to Rs.22,000/- and OPs 1 to 3 are liable to pay the same to the complainants within two months from today along with interest at 9% p.a from the date of complaint i.e., 04.02.2015.  Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as affirmative to the complainants.

 

        16.   Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated there in we pass the following.

 

ORDER

 

        It is ordered that the complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is hereby partly allowed against the OPs.

 

        It is further ordered that, OPs are jointly and severally liable to pay remaining amount of Rs.22,000/- to the complainants including the costs and balance of compensation amount with interest at 9% p.a from 04.02.2015 till payment on Rs.17,000/- and shall pay the said amount within two months from today. 

        Accordingly, complaint is partly allowed.     

       

(This order is made with the consent of President and Member after the correction of the draft on 30/07/2015 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures.)   

 

MEMBER                   MEMBER                      PRESIDENT

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

Complainant No.2 by filing affidavit evidence taken as PW-1.

 

Witness examined on behalf of complainant:

                                                -Nil-

 On behalf of OP Sri. B.S. Jagadeesh, Executive Engineer of BESCOM, Chitradurga as DW-1 by filing affidavit evidence. 

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of OP:

-Nil-

Documents marked on behalf of complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	True copies of FIR
02	Ex-A-2:-	Copy of complaint,
03	Ex-A-3:-	Copy of Spot Mahazar,
04	Ex-A-4:-	Copy of inquest mahazar
05	Ex-A-4:-	Copy of Statement of Ramesh
06	Ex-A-4:-	Copy of Statement of Manjunath
07	Ex-A-4:-	Copy of UDR report
08	Ex-A-4:-	Copy of PM report

 

Documents marked on behalf of Opponent:

 

-NIL-

 

MEMBER                   MEMBER                      PRESIDENT

Rhr.