BALKAS SINGH vs H.S.E.B.

THE unsuccessful complainant appeals against the order of the District Forum, Jind dismissing the complaint.

AS we are firmly inclined to uphold the order under appeal, it is unnecessary to delve too deeply into the facts and merits in this judgment of affirmance. It suffices to mention that in his Complaint the appellant had alleged that his she-buffalo was grazzing in his village field Durana on the 13th of July, 1992 at 11 a.m. when she touched the stay wire of an electric pole which was alleged to be without safety insulators and consequently charged with high voltage current leading to its instant electrocution. It was the case that he consequently suffered a loss of Rs. 16,000/- apart from mental and physical harassment and sought redress at the doors of the District Forum. In resolutely defending the complaint, the respondent-Board raised legal objections to which reference now becomes unnecessary. On merits, it was firmly pleaded that all the apparatus including wires, poles machinery connected to the supply of electricity were being properly maintained and watched regularly in the area of supply. In terms it was alleged that the complainant used to tether his buffalo with the pole of the transformer despite warning and on the material day her horns had entangled with the stay wires and in attempting to struggle herself free, she pulled the stay wires, with the result that the insulators thereof were broken and that wires touched the other electric wires which led to the animal''s electrocution. It was further the case that on enquiry, it has been found that the complainant tampered with the cable of the common pole to get more energy which resulted in the jumper of the cable touching with the link of the stay wire. It was firmly pleaded that the complainant and his father had infact confessed their error in the presence of other persons at the time of spot inspection. The refrain of the reply was that the complainant was himself negligent, careless and indeed had caused damage to the equipment of the Board by his patent default. It was repeated that even after through investigation by the Board not the least lapse was found on its part.

The parties led evidence in support of their respective cases and apparently the photographs taken immediately after the incident, were also placed on the record. The District Forum on the basis of all the materials before it came to the firm conclusion that far from the complainant establishing that his buffalo died due to the carelessness or the negligence of the respondent, it was clear that he had tethered the animal with the pole of the transformer and due to the entanglement of the horns with the stay wires she struggled violently to release ''herself resulting in the insulator being displaced and wires broken, which consequently led to the animal''s electrocution. It further noticed that from the photographs placed on the record by the complainant himself, it was clear that the buffalo has been tethered with the electric pole. Inevitably, the complaint was dismissed.

MR. J.S. Chaudhary, the learned Counsel for the appellant faced with the up-hill task of projecting a crumbling case, took shelter behind technicalities. Our attention was sought to be drawn to the Rule 90 and the duties enjoined on the Board to keep the electric apparatus in good repair. It was the half hearted submission that a lapse in the said duty had resulted in the loss to the appellant. There is not even a modi-cum of merit in the aforesaid submission. There is no quarrel with the provisions of Rule 90 of the duty of care enjoined upon the respondent-Board. However, it appears to us that herein the boot is entirely on the leg of the appellant himself. No meaningful challenge could be laid at all to the firm finding of fact arrived at by the District Forum with which we agree. Even the photographic evidence sought to be placed on the record by the complainant indicated that the animal had been tethered to the pole. Further these clearly show that the curved horns of the she-buffalo had got entangled in the wires and it is elementary that the animal would instinctively strive to release itself and used all its native force to do so. It is somewhat elementary that the electricity poles are not tethers and pegs for animals and the appellant was himself plainly negligent in tying the buffalo, to the pole. It seems unnecessary to labour the point and it is amply sufficient to record that we are unhesitatingly in agreement with the view taken by the District Forum which is hereby affirmed.

THIS appeal is hereby dismissed, but taking the consumer-status of the appellant in view, we indulgently decline to burden the appellant with any costs. Appeal dismissed.