Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 406
Instituted on : 05.09.2018
Decided on : 20.05.2024
Jagdish age 50 years son of Shri Ram r/o 501/2 Krishna colony near Gaur School Rohtak.
……….………….Complainant.
Vs.
- Executive Engineer, UHBVN Ltd. City Op. Division, Rohtak.
- S.D.O. UHBVN Ltd. Sub Division 3 Rohtak
- Municipal Corporation Rohtak through its Executive officer.
...........……Respondents/opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.R.S.Saini Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Ajay Gaur, Advocate for the opposite party No.1 & 2.
Sh.Vishal Bhatia Advocate for opposite party No.3.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that the complainant was having a buffalo and on 8.8.2018 at about 5.45 PM, the complainant was bringing the said buffalo to his house from water Khel/pond. In the way, an electricity pole was installed by the electricity department and another pole was installed by Municipal Corporation and electricity was passing through the said poles and when the buffalo of complainant was passing through the said poles, due to heavy current, the body of buffalo electrocuted and due to electrocution, the buffalo died at the spot. The examination of body was conducted by the Vety. Surgeon at the spot and post mortem report was prepared on 09.08.2018. The buffalo of the complainant died due to sole fault and negligence on the part of opposite parties and their officials because they did not care to check the said poles and to remove the electricity current from the poles. After the said incident, the officials of electricity board came at the spot and disconnected the supply. The complainant reported the matter to concerned police and DD No.9 dated 09.08.2018 was recorded in PP Gau Karan Rohtak. The buffalo of the complainant was of Murrah breed and the market value of the said buffalo was about Rs.2,00,000/-. The buffalo was pregnant of 9 months. The complainant was earning his livelihood by selling the milk of said buffalo and due to death of said buffalo complainant suffered financial loss. The complainant requested the opposite parties to pay compensation on account of death of said buffalo to the complainant but the opposite parties finally a week ago refused to pay any heed to the request of complainant. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay Rs.200000/- alongwith interest from the date of death of buffalo and also to pay Rs.50000/- as compensation on account of harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party No.1 & 2 in their reply has submitted that the alleged buffalo was lying down dead near the iron pole situated at the spot and the buffalo has been got shocked by coming into the contact to this pols. On observing the situation and circumstances, it was found that the iron pole from which the buffalo get shocked was not having kind of concerned of U.H.B.V.Nigam/opposite parties. . It is further submitted that a street light was installed at this pole by the Nagar Nigam which was given supply from UHBVN Ltd. PCC pole and the same is approximately 5 feet apart from the pole and no flowing current into iron pole during the testing which allegedly shocked the buffalo. It was found that the wire of street light was having a measurable cut into the solution of it and due to it current started flowing in to the iron pole. It is further stated that to confirm the reason of flowing current in iron pole, the street light wire was separated from the iron pole and checked again with instrument and then found there was no current flowing into iron pole. Videography of the site was also done. So the opposite parties are not at fault at all in any manner. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied. It is further stated that on site inspection and checking by instruments it was found that the opposite parties are not at fault in any manner and the same was reported accordingly. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and opposite party No 1 & 2 prayed for dismissal of compliant with costs.
3. Opposite party No.3 in its reply has submitted that the Municipal Corporation has installed the street lights on poles installed by UHBVNL. At the time of alleged incident there was day time and electricity was off on the poles. So the opposite party is not liable for the said incident in any manner. It is the responsibility of electricity department to properly maintain the poles and wires. It is prayed that the complaint may kindly be dismissed with cost qua the opposite party.
3. Ld. counsel for complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavits Ex.CW1/A, Ex.CW2/A, Ex.CW4/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C8 and closed his evidenced on 25.02.2020. Ld. Counsel for opposite party No.2 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 and closed his evidence on 17.11.2021. Ld. Counsel for opposite parties No.1 & 2 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/B and closed his evidence on 10.02.2022. Ld. counsel for opposite party No.3 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW3/A and closed his evidence on 10.02.2022.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. We have perused the documents placed on record by both the parties.
In the present case it is not disputed that per copy of PMR Ex.C3, the cause of death of buffalo is due to nervous shock caused by electric current and the cost of buffalo is approx. Rs.80000/-. Photographs of dead buffalo are also placed on record as Ex.C1, Ex.C5 to Ex.C7. The contention of the opposite party No.1 & 2 is that the iron pole from which the buffalo get shocked was not having any kind of UHBVNL wires and is totally idle from UHBVNL part. As per the affidavit Ex.RW1/B, it is submitted that on enquiry about the matter it was found that a street light was installed at the pole by the Nagar Nigam which was given supply from the UHBVN PCC pole 5 feet apart from that pole, there is the fault in the street light due to which electric current passes through rail pole and buffalo was electrocuted and Municipal corporation Rothak is fully reasonable for this accident(Ex.RW1/B). On the other hand as per the reply filed by opposite party No.3, Municipal Corporation has installed the street lights on poles installed by UHBVNL. At the time of alleged incident there was day time and electricity was off on the poles. Hence the opposite party no.3 is not liable for the said incident in any manner.
6. From the documents placed on record by both the parties it is not disputed that the death of buffalo was due to electrocution. It is not disputed by the opposite party no.3 that they have installed the street lights on poles. Regarding the plea taken by the opposite party no.3 that at the time of incident, there was a day time and lights were off, we have perused the complaint and affidavit filed by complainant, as per which the incident happened at 5.45PM. Hence without any authentic evidence it cannot be assumed that the lights were off. On the other hand, as per reply and affidavit filed by the opposite party no.1, during investigation it was found that there was a measurable cut in the wire of street light, due to which the current start flowing into the iron pole and buffalo get electrocuted by coming into contact of the said pole. On the other hand, it is not proved on file by the opposite party no.3 that the liability of upkeep and maintenance of street lights installed by the Municipal Corporation is of electricity department. In this regard we have placed reliance upon the law of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in judgment dated 05.04.2014 titled as Smt. Afsari Vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd., as per which it is held that: “It is proved that the responsibility of the maintenance and up keep of the high mast electric pole in question was upon the defendant No. 2 and the defendant No. 2 awarded the contract for maintenance and up keep of the same to defendant No. 4. The defendant No. 1 is not liable as there is no fault/negligence of defendant No. 1. The electricity pole in question was set up by the MCD for street light and the electricity was tapped by the MCD from the pole set up by BSES. It was the responsibility of the MCD and the defendant No. 4 being contractor of MCD to maintain the pole in question”. In view of the aforesaid law which is fully applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case, it is observed that Municipal Corporation i.e. opposite party No.3 is liable to compensate the complainant. As per copy of PMR Ex.C3 the approx.. market value of the buffalo is Rs.80000/-. Hence the opposite party no.3 is liable to pay the alleged amount to the complainant
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and directed the opposite party No.3 to pay the amount of Rs.80000/-(Rupees eighty thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 05.09.2018 till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.10000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
20.05.2024.
........................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member
