State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Punjab Electricity Board Through Its ... vs Nahar Singh S/O Sh. Gurdial Singh on 26 March, 2012
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB,
DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH.
First Appeal No. 973 of 2007
Date of Institution : 06.07.2007
Date of decision : 26.03.2012
Punjab Electricity Board through its Secretary, The Mall, Patiala
...Appellant
Versus
Nahar Singh s/o Sh. Gurdial Singh R/o village Mehlan, Tehsil sunam, Distt.
Sangrur.
...Respondent
First Appeal against the order dated
04.05.2007 of the District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sangrur.
Before:-
Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.N.Aggarwal, President.
Sh.Baldev Singh Sekhon, Member.
Present:-
For the appellant : Sh. S.K. Gupta, Advocate
For the respondent : Sh. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate for
Sh. M.K. Singla, Advocate
BALDEV SINGH SEKHON, MEMBER
This appeal is against the order dated 04.05.2007 passed by the District consumer Forum, Sangrur (in short the "District Forum") vide which the complaint of the respondent was allowed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent-complainant took 14 kilas of land at village Mehlan-B on lease from Sh. Jasbir Singh and Sh. Swarn Singh sons of Sh. Devinder Singh, resident of Mehlan along with one tube well connection which was running in the name of the said Sh. Swarn Singh, in the above said land. It was pleaded that the respondent used the above said land and the said electric tube well connection being beneficiary of the same. Respondent being the lease holder used to deposit electricity charges of this tube well connection as and when demanded by the appellants.
3. It was further pleaded that the appellants had installed electric poles in the above said land for the main electric wires and the said electric wires were loose from very long time. The respondent gave intimation to the appellant First Appeal No. 973 of 2007 2 in this regard and requested many times to rectify the same but the appellants did not heed the request of the respondent.
4. On 05.04.2006 at 3:30 pm electric sparks came from the above said electric poles and electric wires and the same fell on the crop of the respondent. Due to these sparks, the crop of the respondent caught fire and about 4 kilas of wheat crop was burnt. The respondent gave information to the police post, Mehlan and police recorded the DDR No. 17 dated 05.04.2006 after inspecting the spot. The respondent also submitted an application to Tehsildar, Sunam and Halka Patwari made his report on the said application after inspecting the spot. It was further pleaded that the respondent suffered a loss of Rs. 60,000/- due to the negligence and deficient services provided by the appellants as the appellants did not remove the defect in the electric wires. The respondent visited the office of appellant no.2, number of times but all in vein. Hence, the complaint before the District Forum seeking directions to the appellants to pay Rs. 60,000/- in lieu of the loss suffered by the respondent. Costs and compensation were also prayed.
5. Upon notice, the appellants filed written statement in which it was pleaded that the respondent was not the consumer of the Appellate Board because as per record of the PSEB the connection in question was running in the name of Sh. Swarn Singh. Neither Sh. Swarn Singh nor the present respondent intimated to the PSEB that the land, in which the above said electric connection had been installed, was given on lease to Sh. Nahar singh and the respondent had never obtained any services from PSEB for consideration of the above said AP electric connection. It was denied that the wires fixed on the pole were loose for very long time. Further, it was admitted that electric wires for the HT line were provided on the said pole installed in the fields. It was also denied that on 05.04.2006 electric sparks came from the above said electric pole and electric wires and the same fell on the crop of the respondent, due to which 4 kilas of standing wheat was burnt. The loss of Rs. 60,000/- suffered by respondent due to alleged fire was also denied.
5. Dismissal of the complaint was prayed.
First Appeal No. 973 of 2007 3
6. The parties led their evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
7. The learned District Forum, after going through the pleadings of the parties and the evidence on record, allowed the complaint of the respondent and directed the appellants to pay to the respondent a sum of Rs. 30,000/- in lieu of consolidated amount of compensation on account of loss of crop, Rs. 5,000/- on account of mental pain agony and harassment and Rs. 1,000/- as litigation expenses.
8. Aggrieved by this order the appellants have come up in appeal.
9. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the respondent had not given any intimation to the Appellate Board regarding loose wires passing through his fields up to the occurrence of the incident and there was no entry in the complaint register about the complaint of loose wires up to 04.05.2006. '
9. It was further submitted that on the day of incident the supply of electricity to the HT line was shut down due to some repair works as was evident from the record of the PSEB. It was, therefore, not possible that sparking can take place when there was no electricity supply in the electric wires. It was further submitted that the respondent filed the complaint to the Tehsildar and Halka patwari who visited the site and assessed the loss and showed that crop on 2.1/2 acres of land had been burnt and not on 4 acres. This inspection was done without any notice to the PSEB authorities who should have been present at the time of visit of Patwari or Tehsildar. Acceptance of the appeal was prayed.
10. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the appellants did not take the plea before the District Forum in written statement that there was no supply in the electric lines at the time of occurrence of the incident. Further submitted that the appeal be dismissed.
11. The submissions have considered and record has been perused.
12. The appellants have contended that the respondent was not the consumer of the appellants, however, the respondent has pleaded that he had taken the 14 acres of land along with electric connection on lease from Sh. Swarn Singh and Jasbir Singh both sons of Sh. Devinder singh and respondent First Appeal No. 973 of 2007 4 has placed on record their affidavit as Ex-C2, wherein it has been clearly stated that land as well as tube well connection existing in the name of Sh. Swarn Singh was given on lease to the respondents. Thus, the respondent was the beneficiary of the electric tube well connection existing in the name of Sh. Swarn Singh, Accordingly he was the consumer qua the appellants.
13. The respondent has also placed on record the report of the Halka Patwari as Ex-C5 in which it has been mentioned that the standing wheat crop in the kila No.69//6-7 and 69//14-15 was damaged due to electric spark on 05.04.2006. The respondent has also placed on record the fard jamabandi as Ex-C9 in which it has been specified that land bearing Khasra No. 69//14-15-16-17 belong to Sh. Swarn Singh and Devinder Singh. Thus, it is proved that 4 acres of standing wheat crop was burnt and damaged in the incident of fire on15.04.2006.
14. It has been admitted by the appellants that the electric pole and wires were crossing the fields which were on lease with the respondent. The appellants have contended that the wires were tight and not loose as alleged by the respondent but the respondent has placed on record the photographs of the damaged crop as Ex-C10, C-11 & C-12 in which the burnt crop and the electric wires passing over the damaged/burnt crop can be seen which are being tightened by the employees of appellants confirming that these wires were tightened after the incidence of fire.
15. The appellants have now taken the plea that there was no supply in the electric wires on the date of incidence and, therefore, there was no chance of sparking from these wires passing over there fields of the respondent. But the appellants have neither taken this plea in the written statement nor produced any evidence to this effect before the District Forum. Therefore, this plea cannot be accepted at the appellate stage
16. In view of the above discussion and findings it is held that the standing wheat crop in 4 acres of land was got damaged due to fire which occurred on account of sparking in loose wires passing over the fields of the respondents.
First Appeal No. 973 of 2007 5
17. However, the compensation granted by the District Forum is reduced from Rs. 30,00/- to Rs. 12,000/- i.e. at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per acre as per guidelines issued by Punjab Govt. to Chairman PSEB, which were effective from 17.08.2001.
18. In view of the circumstances of the case the compensation on account of mental agony and litigation charges are waived off. The appeal of the appellant is partly accepted and the impugned order of District forum is modified to that extent.
19. The appellants had deposited Rs.18,000/- in this Commission at the time of filing of appeal on 06.07.2007. Out of this amount Rs. 12,000/- be paid by Registry to the respondent and remaining amount along with interest on Rs. 18,000/-, if any, be refunded to the appellants by way of crossed cheque / bank draft after expiry of 45 days.
20. The arguments in this case were heard on 13.03.2012 and the order was reserved. Now parties be communicated about the same.
21. The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of court cases.
(Justice S.N.Aggarwal) President (Baldev Singh Sekhon) Member March 26, 2012.
Kumud