Haryana

Karnal

CC/227/2015

Jai Singh S/o Raghunath - Complainant(s)

Versus

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Vishal Turan

13 Dec 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.  

                                                               Complaint No.227 of 2015

                                                             Date of instt.:22.09.2015

                                                              Date of decision:13.12.2016

 

Jai Singh son of Shri Raghunath resident of village Bastara, Tehsil Gharaunda, District Karnal.

 

                                                                   ……..Complainant.

                                      Vs.

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Gharaunda, through its Sub Divisional Officer (OP)

 

                                                                   ………… Opposite Party.

                     Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before                   Sh.K.C.Sharma……….President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:-      Sh.Vishan Turan Advocate for the complainant.

                    Sh. Virender Sachdeva Advocate for the Opposite party.

                  

 ORDER:

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer protection Act 1986, on the averments that he was the owner of the land measuring 37K-3M situated at village Bastara, vide Jamabandi for the year 2011-2012. He was consumer of the opposite party, as he was having an electric connection no.ZA11-1027-F and paying the electricity bills regularly. There was an electric wire pole in his land. Electric wires were very loose and he had brought that fact to the knowledge of officials of the opposite party but they did not bother. On 13.04.2015 due to loose wires of the electric pole short circuit had occurred, as a result of which his wheat crop in killa nos.3 (6-19) and 4/1(6-16) was burnt and turned into ashes. NCR no.42/2015 dated 27.04.2015 was reported/lodged by the police of Police Station Madhuban. He intimated the opposite party about the said incident. Concerned Patwari Halqa and other Revenue official also visited the spot and made report fire and burning of the wheat crop. He requested the opposite party to make the payment of the loss suffered by him due to deficiency in service on the part of its officials, who had not taken seriously the matter regarding loose wires despite repeated requests, but opposite party did not pay any heed to his request. He has suffered loss of Rs.one lac on account of burning of his wheat crop due to negligence of the opposite party and also suffered mental pain, agony and unnecessary harassment.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite party, who appeared and filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that the complainant has no locus standi and cause of action to file the complaint; that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands; that the complaint is an abuse of process of law and this Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as per provisions of Section 145 of Indian Electricity Act.

                   On merits, it has been denied on 13.04.2015 a short circuit had occurred in the electric wires due to loose wires of the electric poles and crop of the complainant was burnt, as alleged. It has been submitted that no such short circuit had taken place. The crop of the complainant had not burnt due to any fault of the opposite party. Moreover, as per section 161 of the Electricity Act 2003, if any accident occurs in connection with the generation, transmission, supply or use of electricity or in connection with any part of the electricity lines or electrical plant of any person or animals and the accident results or is likely to have resulted to a human being or animal, such person shall give a notice of the occurrence of any such loss or injury actually caused by the accident, in such form and within such time as prescribed to the Electrical Inspector, who is legally authorized to enquire and report as to the cause of any accident, but no intimation of the alleged accident was given by the complainant to the opposite party. It has been asserted that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied.

3.                In evidence of the complainant, his affidavit EX.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to C4 and photographs Ex.C5 to Ex.C8 have been tendered.

4.                On the other hand, in evidence of the opposite party, the affidavit of Parveen Dahiya SDO Ex.OP1/A and documents Ex.OP1/B and Ex.OP1/C have been tendered.

5.                We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

6.                There is no dispute between the parties regarding the fact that the complainant was having electric connection no.ZA11-1027-F. Thus, he was a consumer of the opposite party. As per the case of the complainant electric pole was erected in his land and the wires on the said electric pole were loose and this fact was brought to the notice and knowledge of the officials of the opposite party. It has further been alleged that on 13.4.2015 due to short circuit in the electric wires of the pole the fire broke out in his wheat crop in the land measuring 13 Kanals 15 Marlas, as a result of which his wheat crop in the said land was burnt and he suffered loss of an amount of Rs.one lac. The opposite party has denied the factum of short circuiting and burning of wheat crop of the complainant as alleged. It has also been submitted that no intimation of the alleged incident was given by the complainant to the opposite party whereas intimation was necessary.

7.                It is worth pointing out at the very outset that the opposite party has raised no dispute regarding the erection of the electric pole in the land of the complainant and condition of electric wires on the said pole as alleged by the complainant in para no.3 of the complaint, because in para no.3 of the written statement it has only been submitted that para no.3 of the complaint is a matter of record, hence same needs no reply. Now, the question arises whether due to short circuiting fire broke out and wheat crop of the complainant in the land measuring 13 kanals 15 marlas was burnt.

8.                The complainant in support of his allegations filed his affidavit Ex.CW1/A. The copy of the Report Roznamcha no.436 dated 13.4.2015 recorded by the Patwari on getting information from Kanshi Ram Chowkidar and Sher Singh Numberdar has also been produced as Ex.C4, wherein it was specifically recorded that at about 3.00a.m. the electric wire had broken due to which wheat crop of the complainant in the land bearing Rect. No.94 kila nos.3 and 4/1 (4-0)  was burnt. Thus, according to the report Roznamcha out of kila no.4/1 only the crop in the area measuring 4 Kanals was burnt. The area of Kila no.3 was not mentioned, though as per copy of Jamabandi Ex.C1 the area of Kila no.3 is 6 Kanals 19 Marlas and the complainant in the complaint has also mentioned the same area. In this way, as per Revenue record the wheat crop of the complainant was burnt only in the land measuring 10 Kanals 19 Marlas. The complainant also lodged First Information Report on 27.4.2015, the copy of which is Ex.C3, regarding burning of his wheat crop in the land measuring 1½ acres due to breaking of the electric wire.

9.                The opposite party has produced the copy of the Daily Log Sheet dated 13.4.2015 of 132KV Sub Station Gharaunda as Ex.OP1/C, as well as the copy of the report of Suresh Sharma Junior Engineer Ex.OP1/C. As per the daily log sheet the sub station remained switched off from 6.00a.m to 7.45 a.m, there was break down from 8 a.m to 11.00 a.m., permit to work was obtained twice at 12 noon and 1.00 noon and thereafter there was break down upto 7.05 p.m. At about 2.00 p.m. fault was tried to be rectified, but the line did not hold, regarding which information was given to Suresh Sharma Junior Engineer. From the aforesaid record it is emphatically clear that the efforts were made to remove the fault in the line on 13.4.2015, but the line did not hold. The possibility of line not holding could be due to breaking of the wire near electric pole in the land of the complainant, cannot be ruled out. When the officials of the opposite party tried to remove the fault and switched on for testing, there could be sparking in the broken wire and as a result of that the fire could erupt burning the wheat crop of the complainant, because on 13.4.2015 the crop must have dried and ready for harvesting and as such could catch fire immediately. The complainant has also produced the photographs Ex.C5 to Ex.C8 regarding the burnt wheat crop in his field. Thus, the evidence on record is sufficient to prove that the wheat crop of the complainant was burnt due to sparking of the electric wire as the wires were loose near electric pole erected in his land. It is the duty of the opposite party to maintain electric lines in proper order. Not maintaining the electric lines properly and causing accidental fire due to breaking of the wire and short circuiting certainly amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

10.              From the aforediscussed evidence, it is established that the wheat crop of the complainant in the land measuring 10 kanals 19 marlas was burnt totally. The average yield of the wheat crop remains 16 quintals to 20 quintals per acre. The complainant suffered loss on account of negligence on the part of the opposite parties. Taking average of yield as 18 quintals per acre, the complainant suffered loss of about 35,000/- and the opposite party is liable to compensate him.

11.              As a sequel to the foregoing discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the opposite party to pay Rs.35,000/- to the complainant  as compensation. We further direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.5500/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and for the litigation expenses. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 13.12.2016

                                                                                      (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                                         President,

                                                                             District Consumer Disputes

                                                                             Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                             (Anil Sharma)

                               Member