State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Bangalore Electricity Supply Co. Ltd vs G.B.Papanna on 31 March, 2023
1
Appeal No.815/2019
Date of filing: 14.05.2019
Date of disposal: 31.03.2023
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
DATED: 31.03.2023
PRESENT
Mr.K.B SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mrs. DIVYASHREE M : LADY MEMBER
APPEAL NO.815/2019
1) Bangalore Electricity Supply Company
Ltd.,
Rep. by its Chief Engineer (Ele),
O & M Zone, BESCOM,
Chitradurga.
2) Bangalore Electricity Supply Company
Ltd.,
Rep. by its Executive Engineer (Ele),
O & M Circle, BESCOM,
Chitradurga.
3) Bangalore Electricity Supply Company
Ltd.,
Rep. by its Assistant Executive Engineer
(Ele),
BESCOM,
Chitradurga.
4) Bangalore Electricity Supply Company
Ltd.,
Rep. by its Branch Officer (Ele),
BESCOM,
Chitradurga.
.....Appellant/s
(Advocate - Prashant T Pandit)
2
Appeal No.815/2019
V/s
1) Sri.G.B Papanna,
S/o Boosu Govindappa,
Aged about 48 years.
2) Smt.P Manjula,
W/o G.B Papanna,
Aged about 45 years.
Both are residing at:
Hosa Dyamavvanahalli Village,
Taluk & District - Chitradurga-577527.
(Advocate - Sri.B.M Siddappa)
3) Sri.Chandrashekhar,
S/o Narasimhalu,
Aged about 50 years,
Agriculturist,
Kamanabavi Badavane,
Chitradurga - 577527. .....Respondent/s
ORDER
Mr.K.B SANGANNANAVAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an Appeal filed by OPs.1 to 4 in CC No.50/2019 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chitradurga, aggrieved by the order dated 22.03.2019.
2. Complainants.1 and 2 are husband and wife and they are the parents of one Avinash G.P, raised consumer complaint, 3 Appeal No.815/2019 alleging deficiency in service on the part of Ops, have sought for compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the death of their son Avinash occurred in an accident occurred on 15.09.2017 due to electric shock. In this regard the police have registered UDR No.008/2017 and after conduct of investigation submitted a report and when these complainants approached OPs.1 to 4 for compensation was not considered on the ground that they are not the consumers and the death of Avinash was not due to their rendering deficiency in service, since electric accident was occurred in the land of OP-5 who has taken electricity connection from OPs.1 to 4 to his bore well has not properly maintained the electric system, as such they are not entitled for any amount of compensation from OPs.1 to 4.
3. The Forum below held an enquiry by receiving materials on record consisting of evidence of PW-1 Ex.A-1 to 21, DW-1 Ex.B-1 to B-3 held OPs.1 to 4 are liable to pay compensation of Rs.9,57,760/- along with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization, while OP-5 is directed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- along with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization and awarded Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of proceedings. It is this order being assailed in this Appeal contending that Forum below failed to appreciate materials on record in right perception though complainants.1 & 2 in their complaint itself have categorically stated that on 15.09.2017, when Avinash the son of complainants went to the land of OP-5 at about 3.30 PM, while in the process of starting the bore well to get drinking water came in contact with 4 Appeal No.815/2019 electrical shock as a result died was shifted to Hospital however while on the way to Basaveshwara Hospital, Chitradurga. The findings recorded by the forum below are not sustainable in law.
4. On the contrary the Complainants submitted would justified the findings recorded by Forum below, since the incident had taken place due to electric shock while starting bore well situate in the land of OP-5 and would submit that the Forum below has rightly apportioned liability of OPs.1 to 4 at Rs.9,57,760/- and Rs.2,00,000/- liability of OP-5.
5. In view of rival contentions of the parties to the appeal on our examination of the enquiry file could find out that Avinash was studying 2nd PUC at Government Boys Junior College and he was the son of complainants died in the land of OP-5, pursuant to his death due to electrical shock concerned Police registered UDR No.008/2012 and they concluded the investigation submitting C Report that it was the unfortunate accident. In other words, no where police reported that the alleged electrical incident taken place at 3.30. PM on 15.09.2012 in the land of OP-5 was due to improper maintenance of electrical lines by OPs.1 to 4 which connects the Bore-Well electric board. It has come in the enquiry that incident was taken place in the land of OP-5 and is a private land belongs to him and it is his duty to maintain the bore well board properly to use the electric services to pump the water from the bore well. It is not in dispute as the complainants themselves 5 Appeal No.815/2019 have stated in their complaint and information given to the Police that the incident was occurred, while boy Avinash made an attempt to start the bore well as had touched the switch board and got electric shock as a result succumbed on the way to hospital. In our view as the maintenance of the switch board is the duty of OP-5 and not of the OPs.1 to 4. It is therefore considering these facts we found force in the contention of learned counsel for Appellants that complainants.1 & 2 do not fall within the definition of Sec.2 (1) (d) of C.P Act, 1986. It has also come in the enquiry that no complaint made to OPs.1 to 4 after the electrical mishap said to have been occurred on 15.09.2012 at about 3.30 PM either by the land owner- OP5 or the complainants. In our view if really the said incident occurred due to improper maintenance of electric lines by OPs.1 to 4 could have been intimated immediately to OPs.1 to 4 either by OP-5 or at least after incident by complainants No1 & 2 being the parents of deceased Avinash the young boy who succumbed as a result of electric shock while starting bore well to have drinking water when touched the electric switch board. In our view though the Forum below referred the decision in CPJ 2010 (NC) 97 (I) in the case of N.Kunchi Babu and another vs. A.P Transco Hyderabad and others, wherein held wires touching balcony of house child of 14 years age got electrocuted. It was held Sec.2 (1) (g), Sec.14 (1) (d) of C.P Act, 1986 Forum below failed to apply the principles to the facts of the case. It is to be noted herein the facts of the case on hand electric mishap taken place in a private land of OP-5 due to his improper maintenance of electrical switch board meant to start bore well. Further the Forum below wrongly applied the ratio laid 6 Appeal No.815/2019 down in the decision reported in 2002 ACJ 526 (SC) in the case of Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board Vs Shail Kumari and others, wherein held cyclist riding his cycle in the night was electrocuted when he came in contact with live electric wire lying on the road partially in undated with rain water, is again in our view has no application to the facts of the case, yet the forum below wrongly applied to the case on hand where in it is shown that improper maintenance of electric wires and the switch board by OP 5. In such view of the matter in our view the forum below had to be held committed grave error in saddling the liability on OPs.1 to 4 resulting thereby miscarriage of justice.
6. It is to be noted herein as we had an opportunity to examine the UDR report submitted by police consisting of spot panchanama, wherein could see that incident was occurred in the middle portion of survey No.553/1 wherein the bore well is situated and it belongs to one Chandrashekar- OP-5 and this land was protected by barbed wiring fence around the land and the bore well is situated in the middle of this land. The bore well pipe is about 4 feet height from the ground level. The Police have also found bore well pipe and casing pipe got rusted where sump is situated 300 feet away from this bore well pipe. Thus considering this report of the Police, viewed from any angle, it cannot be said at any stretch of imagination incident was occurred due to improper maintenance of electric lines by OPs.1 to 4. In such view of the matter finding recorded by Forum below that death of Avinash in the land of OP-5 while he came in contact with electric wire was due to improper 7 Appeal No.815/2019 maintenance of electric wires by OPs.1 to 4 do not stand in the eyes of law. Hence Commission found force in the contention of learned counsel for Appellants that Forum below not only applied the ratios wrongly but committed grave error to award compensation to complainants.1 & 2 from OPs.1 to 4 and committed grave error in apportioning the award amount fastening the liability of OPs-1 to 4. In such conclusion, we proceed to allow the Appeal. Consequently set aside the order dated 22.03.2019 passed in CC No.50/2019 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chitradurga and in the result dismissed the complaint as against OPs.1 to 4 with no order as to costs.
7. The amount in deposit is directed to be returned to the Appellants with proper identification by their advocate.
8. Provide copy of this order to the District Commission as well as parties to the Appeal.
LADY MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER vln*