SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ELECTRICITY (OPERATION) vs R.C.GUPTA

Mr. Justice K.K. Srivastava, President

BY this order we propose to dispose of two appeals bearing No. 54 of 2000 filed by Sub- Divisional Officer, Electricity and another and Appeal No. 45 of 2000 filed by the complainant Shri R.C. Gupta against one and the same order dated 30.12.1999 passed by the District Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh. This judgment is being delivered in Appeal No. 45 of 2000 filed by the complainant Shri R.C. Gupta and it shall decide Appeal No. 54 of 2000 filed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Electricity and another. Shri R.C. Gupta, complainant approached the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh for grant of damages, costs o( repairs of the electrical appliances and for certain other directions against the respondents i.e. Sub- Divisional Officer, Electricity (Operation), Sub- Division No. 3, Sector 18-A, Chandigarh and Sub-Divisional Engineer, Electrical (Maintenance), Bungalow No. 21, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh. The complainant is an employee of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and in that capacity, he was allotted Government accommodation bearing House No. 95, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh and was in possession of the said house w.e.f. 1.1.1982. The complainant was having electrical appliances at his residence which included refrigerator, desert cooler, mixer- cum-grinder, tube lights, bulbs. It was alleged that on 4.6.1993 at about 8.15 p.m., the electric current of a very high voltage flew through the electric line installed in the house of the complainant which caused considerable damage to the aforesaid electrical appliances. The complainant rushed to the complaint booth of the Electricity Department located in Sector 19- D and requested for some electrician to be deputed to attend to the complaint and check the electrical appliances. It was averred on the same day at abut 11.30 p.m., the employees of the electricity department came to the house of the complainant and they restored electricity to the meter/main board installed outside the house of, the complainant. The complainant, inter alia, prayed for the payment of damages caused to the electrical appliances to the tune of Rs. 5,305.50P. which comprised of a sum of Rs. 1,763.50P and Rs. 3,542/- incurred on the repair of the refrigerator lying with the company. He also claimed damages to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- for mental agony and loss of physical health suffered by him and his family members. He also claimed a sum of Rs. 3,000/- spent towards the expenditure on legal consultations, engaging an Advocate, collecting material evidence, preparation and filing of the instant complaint. The other prayer made by the complainant was about the respondent No. 1 to be awarded exemplary punishment for gross negligence in providing faultless, proper, quick and efficient services to the complainant and his family members/neighbourers. He also prayed for issuance of a direction to respondent No. 1 to immediately provide a proper power connection to the premises of the complainant by installing proper T-Joint'' on the Main Electricity Power Line to prevent any future loss or damage to the electrical installations and other belongings of the complainant and also to avoid any future uncalled for inconvenience/mental agony/ physical loss hardship to the complainant and his family members. The last prayer in Sub-para (f) about a direction to be issued to respondent No. 1 to ensure proper supply of adequate and reasonable voltage through the Electricity Power Line and thus to avoid any future mis-happening and likely danger to the electrical installations; used by the complainant.

The respondents appeared and filed their written statement wherein they denied the averments made in the complaint and took the plea that the wiring involved in the houses in Chandigarh was insulated and bearable to weather conditions. The house of the complainant was no exception to it. The supply to the consumer is given after cutting off the main service wire feeding the total block It was averred that the Tee Off Wire is flexible in nature. It was denied that the light to the house goes off because of its flexibility and loose joints. The averment about the inconvenience caused to the complainant and his family members was denied on the ground that the fluctuation, if any, depended upon the entire load on total power distribution system. The complainant was accused of putting up a concocted and false story with exaggerated version in the complaint. It was also contended that wiring is equipped with MCB which takes care of over loading and short circuiting inside the house. In case of short circuit, MCB is bound to trip and no damage of any kind can occur to the electric appliances in the house. It was averred that ''T-Joint'' referred to in the complaint is a thing of past and not in case presently and has become absolute.

THE replication was filed on behalf of the complainant in which the pleas taken in the written statement of the opposite party were denied and the averments made in the complaint were reiterated. Evidence was led by the complainant as well as the respondent. The Local Commissioner was appointed by the District Forum who after making local inspection of the house of the complainant submitted his report which was, inter alia, to the following effect: "I found that the main electricity power line wires connecting power to House No. 95, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh were in a loose and hanging condition without proper affixation to the wall of the house. There was no insulation on the electricity power line at the points of bifurcation into House No. 95, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh and there exists no insulation tape either covering the joints feeding electricity power supply to House No. 95, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh. A discarded and damaged "T-Joint'' with which the main electricity power line wires should have been connected to the House No. 95, Sector- 19A, Chandigarh was found affixed on the wall without any use. The exposed and uninsulated main power line wires connecting power connection to the House No. 95, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh have/ had every likelihood of the two wires touching each other causing heavy sparking and possibly leading to a short circuit, in the state of affairs reported above."

THE complainant felt aggrieved inasmuch as the District Forum did not award compensation to him for mental agony and loss of physical health etc. and also about the non- grant of interest on the amount awarded by opposite parties. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Electricity (Operation) and Sub-Divisional Engineer, Electrical (Maintenance), Chandigarh on the other hand, felt aggrieved against the order of the District Forum to the extent it allowed the complaint of the complainant and awarded a sum of Rs. 5,305/- together with costs of Rs. 1,000/-. After hearing the complainant Mr. R.C. Gupta in person and Mr. K.L. Goyal, G.P. appearing for the respondent Sub-Divisional Officer, Electricity (Operation) and Sub- Divisional Engineer, Electrical (Maintenance), Chandigarh and after going through the order of the District Forum, we are of the considered view that the District Forum was right in allowing the complaint to the extent it did and no interference in the order of the District Forum is called for by this Commission. The reasons are quite simple and may be briefly mentioned as under : Despite of tall claims made by Mr. K.L. Goyal G.P. appearing on behalf of Sub-Divisional Engineer, Electricity regarding the electricity power line drawn up to the house of the complainant being in a perfectly good condition and not admitting any damage due to any fluctuation in voltage, we find from the report of the Local Commissioner, the said claim being totally disproved. We have quoted the report of the Local Commissioner particularly the last para of his report in which he reported about the condition of the electricity line up to the house of the complainant, It is apparent that the negligence on the part of the Sub-Divisional Engineer and another was writ large in this case. Mr. K.L. Goyal next contended that the power supply to the house of the complainant was restored the same day soon after the complaint was brought to the notice of the Sub-Divisional Engineer, Electricity (Maintenance). We are not impressed with this argument for the simple reason that the damage had already been done to the electrical appliances due to the flowing of the electric current with quite a higher voltage. This could happen in a minimized time when the electric energy with higher voltage faced to the electrical appliances and the damage could not be written of and ignored by the mere fact that the complaint of the complainant was attended to render and the electric supply was restored.

MR. K.L. Goyal further put blame for the poor condition of the electrical wiring in the Government residence occupied by the complainant on the appellant No. 2 i.e. Sub- Divisional Engineer, Electrical (Maintenance), Bangalow No. 21, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh. In our considered view, such a blame cannot be permitted to be put against a co-accused by the co-accused because it is their internal matter and they have in any case to ensure the consumer, the complainant in question about the proper supply of the electric energy. If one of the respondents to the complaint failed in performance of their duty, the complainant could not be deprived of the damages caused to his electrical appliance because of the electric current with higher voltage having passed through the wiring in the house of the complainant. We are thus of the considered view that the appeal filed by the opposite parties of the complaint i.e. Sub-Divisional Officer, Electricity (Operation), Sub-Division No. 3, Sector 18-A, Chandigarh and Sub-Divisional Engineer, Electrical (Maintenance), Bungalow No. 21, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh has no merit and the order passed by the District Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh is affirmed as the appeal of these opposite parties i.e. S.D.O., Electricity (Operation) and S.D.E., Electrical (Maintenance) is concerned.

NOW coming to the appeal filed by the plaintiff, it is suffice to say that the prayer which the complainant sought from the District Forum in relief, (a) about the respondent No. 1 being directed for awarding exemplary punishment for gross negligence; (e) for a direction to provide proper connection to the premises of the complainant by installing proper ''T-Joint'' and; (f) for a direction to respondent No. 1 to ensure proper and reasonable voltage through their electrical power line to avoid any future mis- happening and likely to endanger the electrical installations used by the complainant, are concerned, they are clearly out side the scope of the Consumer Protection Act. The plaintiff may seek redressal of his grievance in regard to this matter covered by reliefs (a), (e) and (f) before an appropriate Forum. So far as the grievance of the appellant / complainant regarding the Forum not awarding interest on the amount of damages concerned, it may be mentioned that the Forum awarded the compensation to the complainant by the order against which this appeal has been filed and no amount of the complaint was being withheld by the respondent in respect of which interest could be awarded by the District Forum during the pendency of the complaint. So far as the compliance of the order is concerned, in case the opposite parties failed to pay the amount awarded to the complainant, the complainant could claim interest thereon against the opposite parties in the execution case. However, it was stated at Bar by Mr. K.L. Goyal, G.P. appearing for the opposite parties in the complaint that half of the amount of compensation awarded by the District Forum has already been paid to the complainant and the remaining half of the amount will be paid shortly. In view of this statement, we think it appropriate that the remaining amount be also paid to the complainant within 30 days from today and in the event of failure to pay the remaining amount to the complainant it will carry interest @ 12% per annum. Lastly, the appellant/complainant strenuously argued about the District Forum in awarding compensation for mental agony and loss of physical health suffered by the complainant and his family members. As a matter of fact, relief (c) for which the amount of Rs. 50,000 /- has been claimed for mental agony, loss of physical health etc. reads as under : "So from the report of Local Commissioner, it is evident that the main electricity power line wires connecting power to the house of the complainant were found in a loose and hanging condition without proper affixation. It is further evident from the report that there was every possibility that exposed and uninsulated main power line wires connecting power connection to the house of complainant, touching each other claused sparking and lead to short circuiting. The learned Govt. Pleader, however, has submitted that MCB was installed outside the house of the complainant by opposite party No. 2 viz. SDO Electrical (Maintenance) which takes care of over-leading and short circuiting. But as the complainant was occupying a Govt, house so it was the responsibility of opposite party No. 2 also to take care of internal wiring. The house in question was under the possession of the complainant since 1.1.1982 so as such there may be natural decay and wear and tear of the internal wiring and other affixtures. Opposite party No. 2 should have periodically checked the same from time to time to avoid any mishappening. The main electricity line connecting power to the house of the complainant was also not in proper condition, as reported by the Local Commissioner, due to which spark occurred in the main electricity line, and electrical appliances of the complainant stood damaged on account of short circuiting of internal wiring. Complainant has placed on file two bills, one bill for Rs. 1,763/- and the other bill for Rs. 3,542/- for repairing the old refrigerator, desert cooler, mixer-cum-grinder and automatic voltage stablizer. There is no rebuttal to this produced by opposite party so as such complainant requires to be compensated with regard to the amount which comes to Rs. 5,305/-. Further Rs. 1,000/-are awarded as costs, against concerned opposite party departments. So as such both the departments are directed to make payment and comply with the order within 30 days of the receipt of copy of the order. The file be consigned to records." A bare perusal of relief (c) will go to show that the complainant was not only claiming damages for mental agony, loss of physical health/ inconvenience/hardship faced by him and his children but also for his neighbourers. Besides it, no specific evidence was produced by the complainant for claiming the amount of compensation in this regard. We have taken through the affidavit of appellant/complainant Shri R.C. Gupta wherein no specific averment was made regarding the amount of compensation being claimed in this regard. Shri R.C. Gupta complainant then drew our attention to Para 22 of his affidavit and said that this should be treated by us to be an ample proof of the amount of damages. Para 22 of the affidavit at internal page 8 reads as under : "That the deponent is justifiably entitled to the reliefs to be granted by this Hon''ble District Forum as prayed for in Sub-paras (a) to (f) of para No. 20 of the complaint dated 7.7.1993."

As a matter of fact, this para does not say any thing about the compensation for mental agony, hardship, loss of physical health etc. but simply says that the deponent (complainant) is justifiably entitled to the reliefs as prayed in paragraphs (a) to (e) of para 22 of the complaint, thus, in our considered view, cannot be treated to be evidence much less credible evidence regarding the compensation for mental agony, hardship etc. In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the view that there is no merit in the appeal filed by the plaintiff Shri R.C. Gupta. Resultantly, both the appeals lack merit and are dismissed. Appeals dismissed.