The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the definition of 'consumer' under the Consumer Protection Act and the requirement of evidence to support claims of negligence.

ORDER

Mr. K.B. Gawali, Member (Oral)- This appeal is filed by the original opponent No. 1 against the judgment and order dated 29.9.2007 passed by the Dist. Consumer Forum, Nanded in CC. No. 19/2007 whereby the complaint is partly allowed and appellant is held for the deficiency in service. Respondent herein is the original complainant. For the sake of brevity the appellant who is the officer of the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. is herein after termed as the opponent "MSEDCL" whereas the respondent is termed as the "complainant".

2. The brief facts leading to the present appeal are that the Complainant who is the resident of Unchegaon Tq. Hadgaon, Dist. Nanded. That, on 6.11.2006 when the complainant in his bullock cart was going out side the said village, either of the bullocks received electric shock and was died on the spot. It was contended that, there was some defects in the electric line due to which the electric current had entered in to the electric pole standing beside the said village road. That there was a waste water flowing on the said road by touching the said electric pole and hence was charged with the electric current. That, when the complainant was travelling in his bullock cart from the said road his either of the bullocks was walked through the electrically charged water and received a electric shock resulting in to it's on the spot. It was contended that, earlier of this incident also there were cases of getting electric shock to some of the residents of the said village due to leakage of the electric current in the said pole and the officer of the opponent company were informed about the same from time to time. However, no action was taken by the opponent MSEDCL due to which he had to suffer loss of loosing his bullock which was costing Rs. 15,000.

3. It is further contended by the complainant that he had intimated the said incident to the concern wiremen of the appellant who immediately stopped the electric supply of the pole. He had also intimated the said incident to the police who had arranged the postmortem of the said bullock. That, as per the post-mortem report it was revealed that his bullock was died of electric shock. He therefore contended that due to negligence on the part of MSEDCL he had to sustain the said loss. He further averred that the electric bill of the street light was being paid by the Gram Panchayat and the same was used to be recovered from the citizens of the village and he being one of the citizens was a consumer of the opponent MSEDCL. He further contended that he had approached the MSEDCL and claimed the compensation towards the loss of his bullock sustained by him but it was denied and hence, he approached to the Dist. Consumer Forum seeking direction to the opponent MSEDCL to pay him a compensation of Rs. 25,000 which included Rs. 15,000 towards cost of the said bullock and Rs. 10,000 due to loss of his agricultural income which he could not get as his bullock was died.

4. The opponent MSEDCL appeared before the Dist. Consumer Forum and denied the claim in toto. It was contended that the complainant is not their consumer and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. The other averment of the complainant regarding leakage of the electric current on the pole and water flowing on the road whereby causing the electric shock to the bullock on 6.11.2006, etc. have been totally denied stating as false and baseless. It was thus requested that the complaint being false and not maintainable be dismissed with cost of Rs 10,000.

5. The Dist. Consumer Forum after considering the evidence on record and hearing the parties has partly allowed the complaint and directed the opponent MSEDCL to pay to the complainant a compensation of Rs 15,000 towards the cost of his bullock within a period of 30 days failing which was directed to pay interest at @ 9% p.a. from 6.11.2006 till the payment of the entire amount. In addition it was also directed to pay Rs 1000 as the co