State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Vinayak Bhaurao Bodkhe vs M S E D C L Amaravati on 4 February, 2015
1
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
MAHARASHTRA NAGPUR CIRCUIT BENCH
NAGPUR
First Appeal No. A/10/749
(Arisen out of Order Dated 27/10/2010 in Case No. CC/20/10 of District Yavatmal)
1. VINAYAK BHAURAO BODKHE
LONI, POST MOHA, TAH PUSAD
DIST. YAVATMAL
2. BHAURAO APPAJI BODAKHE
LONI, POST MOHA, TAH PUSAD
DIST. YAVATMAL ...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
MSEDCL
PUSAD
DIST YAVATMAL
2. JR. ENGINEER MSEDCL
PUSAD
DIST YAVATMAL ...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
HON'ABLE MR. B.A.Shaikh PRESIDING MEMBER
HON'ABLE MRS. Jayshree Yengal MEMBER
For the Mr. Vinayak Bodkhe
Appellant:
For the None
Respondent:
ORDER
(Passed On 4/2/2015) Per Smt. Jayshree Yengal, Hon'ble Member
1. Being not satisfied by the order dated 27/10/2010, passed by the District Consumer Forum, Yavatmal, partly allowing the Consumer complaint bearing No. 20 of 2010, thereby directing the Ops/ respondent herein to pay the complainants Rs. 10,000/- as compensation towards mental and physical harassment and Rs. 2,000/- more towards cost of proceedings and further directed the Ops to conduct spot inspection of the agricultural fields of the complainants and in case the electricity connection is still in state of 2 disconnection then Ops to re-connect the same and submit the report to that effect with the Forum, the original complainants have filed this appeal.
2. Appellant No. 1 Mr. Vinayak Bhaurao Bodkhe and appellant No. 2 Bhaurao Appaji Bodkhe to be referred as complainant Nos. 1 and 2 respectively and respondent No. 1, Executive Engineer and respondent No. 2, Junior Engineer of Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., Pusad to be referred as Ops. Nos. 1 and 2 respectively for the sake of convenience.
3. The complainant Nos. 1 and 2 filed a Consumer complaint claiming compensation of Rs. 3,60,000/- each towards damage incurred because of loss of crop as the OP failed to repair the broken electricity wires which were lying in the fields of the complainants due to which the complainants were deprived of electricity supply and as a result could not water the crop standing in their fields as the electric pump could not be operated.
4. Brief facts as laid down by the complainant are as follows.
Both the complainants are having agricultural fields bearing survey No. 13 and 14 admeasuring two hectres each at Mauja Loni, Taluka Pusad, District Yavatmal respectively. The complainants are in occupation of agriculture to earn their livelihood. Both the complainants are having separate electricity connection bearing Consumer No. 387190355324 and Consumer No. 387190355391 respectively. On 12/11/2009, the electricity wire passing over the fields of the complainants broke down as a result the electricity supply was disrupted. The complainants immediately informed the Ops about the same and requested to repair the broken wires and restore the electricity supply as there was standing crop of sugarcane and gram seeds in the fields of the complainants which required proper watering 3 immediately. The Ops however failed to take any cognizance of the said complaint. The complainants therefore by letter dated 4/12/2009, again informed the OP No. 1 about the broken wires and requested him to restore the electricity supply by repairing the broken wires. The SDO on the same day directed the OP No. 1 to verify the complaint and submit the report. The Talathi, Loni recorded spot Panchanama on 17/12/2009 in which it has recorded that the sugarcane and gram crop over 1.10 hectre/R and 0.80 hectre/R of land was in dried up condition due to want of water supply as the electric pump was not working since 30 to 35 days due to disruption of electricity. Although the well to which the electric pump was installed contained about 15 feet of water. The Talathi also submitted his report to that effect. The agriculture officer, also conducted spot inspection of the agriculture fields of the complainants on 16/12/2009 and submitted its report that the standing crop of sugar cane and grams seeds were lying in dried up condition. The complainants therefore claimed damages of Rs. 3,90,000/- towards the lossof sugarcane and gram crop of each field.
5. The complainants further contended that the OP failed to render any service as a result they incurred loss of crop. Therefore alleging accordingly filed a consumer complaint seeking damages of Rs. 3,60,000/- for each field and Rs. 50,000/- more as compensation for mental and physical harassment to each complainant and Rs. 10,000/- more towards cost of proceedings.
6. The Ops resisted the complaint by filing their written version and denied all the adverse allegation of the complainants. The Ops specifically submitted that when they visited the fields of the complainants on 27/11/2009, they noticed that the electricity supply to the electric pump of the complainants was regular and proper and the complainants had filed a frivolous 4 consumer complaint which deserves to be dismissed. The Ops also specifically submitted that the complainants are not entitled to any damages as they have neither incurred any loss nor have they brought any evidence on record in support of the damages claimed.
7. The Forum after hearing both the sides and perusing the documents filed on record by both the parties, partly allowed the complaint and granted Rs. 10,000/- as compensation towards mental and physical harassment and Rs. 2,000/- towards cost of proceedings with directions to regularize the electricity connection to the complainants. Being not satisfied by the impugned order the original complainants have filed this appeal.
8. We heard appellant No. 1 in person and perused the written notes of arguments filed by both the parties, copy of the complaint, written version and documents filed on record by both the parties. On perusal of letter dated 4/12/2009, Panchanama and report dated 17/12/2009 by Talathi, Loni and Panchanama and report dated 16/12/2009 by agriculture officer, the only inference that can be drawn is that the complainant informed about the breaking of electric wires in his field to the OPs and that as per the Panchanama prepared by the Talathi and Agriculture Officer and the report submitted thereof, the standing crops of sugarcane and gram were damaged due to the broken electric wires which were spread over the fields of the complainants. We also perused the report dated 5/2/2010 given by one Ramesh Dudhe, Linemen of the OP submitting therein that the broken wires from pole No. 3 which were lying in the fields of Bhaurao Appaji Bodkhe and Vinayak Bhaurao Bodkhe were joined and the electric supply was restored at 5.00 o clock on that day. Therefore the only inference that can be drawn is that undisputedly the complainants were 5 without electricity supply from 12/11/2009 to 5/2/2010 and so the electric pump could not have been operated due to non supply/disruption of electricity and the crop was damaged for want of irrigation. The Forum accepted these facts and recorded its observations in respect of deficiency in services rendered by the OP. But Forum despite of accepting damage caused to the crops due to rendering deficient service to complainants by Ops, did not allow compensation towards damages incurred due to loss of crop. For the foregoing reason, we are of the reasoned view that the complainants were deprived of electricity supply from 12/11/2009 to 05/2/2010 due to deficiency in service rendered by the OP as a result the complainants incurred loss of crop and therefore the complainants deserve to be properly compensated towards the same. Although the complainants have failed to bring on record any documents in support of the claim of Rs. 3,60,000/-, we feel that in view of the fact that undisputedly the crop of gram on area of 80 R and sugarcane on area of one hectre 10 R in each fields was damaged, compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- in each field would be just and proper. They are also entitled to cost of Rs. 5000/- each. Therefore in the result, we pass the following order.
ORDER
1. Appeal is partly allowed.
2. The respondents/original opposite party to pay compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards damage of crops and mental and physical harassment to each of the complainant.
3. The respondents/original opposite parties do pay to each of the complainant costs of Rs. 5000/-.
64. No order as to cost in appeal.
5. Copy of order be furnished to both the parties, free of cost.
[HON'ABLE MR. B.A.Shaikh] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'ABLE MRS. Jayshree Yengal] MEMBER ph