Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Deepa Sharma, Member
CHHATTISGARH STATE POWER DISTRIBUTION CO LTD - Appellant
Vs.
MUKESH KUMAR SATNAMI AND ORS - Respondent
Revision Petition No. 2225 of 2017
Decided On : 30-08-2018
Rashmi Singh, Adv., Brajesh Pandey, Adv.
The court emphasized the duty of the electricity provider to repair broken wires and ensure continuity of electrical energy supply to consumers as per the Chhattisgarh State Electricity Supply Code 2011.
Headnote:
Electricity - Deficiency in Service - Chhattisgarh State Electricity Supply Code 2011 - Rule 5.5, Rule 5.6
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner provided a domestic electric connection to a consumer. The consumer's wife got electrocuted due to a broken neutral wire, leading to her death. The petitioner contested the complaint, claiming the consumer did not inform about the broken wire and alleging the consumer's negligence.
Finding of the Court:
The District Forum found in favor of the consumer, citing the consumer's notification of the broken wire and the petitioner's duty to repair it. The State Commission upheld the finding of deficiency in service and awarded compensation to the consumer.
Issues: The issues revolved around the consumer's notification of the broken wire, the petitioner's duty to repair it, and the alleged negligence of the consumer.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the consumer had duly informed the petitioner about the broken wire, and the petitioner had a duty to repair it as per Rule 5.5 of the Chhattisgarh State Electricity Supply Code 2011. The court also emphasized the petitioner's responsibility to ensure continuity of electrical energy supply to the consumer as per Rule 5.6.
Final Decision: The revision petition was dismissed as the court found no illegality or perversity in the impugned order.
JUDGMENT/ORDER :
Deepa Sharma, Presiding Member - The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 01.03.2017 of the Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal no. 466 of 2016. This appeal was filed by the petitioner before the State Commission against the order of the District Forum whereby the complaint of the respondent was allowed vide order dated 30th June 2016. The grievance of the petitioner iss that the State Commission has wrongly dismissed the appeal and has failed to consider the fact that the complainant/ respondent has not sent due notice of breaking of the neutral wire and also ignored the rules 5.5 and 5.6 of the Chhattisgarh State Electricity Supply Code 2011 while giving the finding that there was deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner.
2. The brief facts of the case necessary for the disposal of the present revision petition, are that a regular domestic electric connection was given to the house of Firtu Ram Lahre in village Kenapali against BP Number 1003531960 by the petitioner. Rukhmani Bai wife of Mukesh Satnami is a consumer of the said electricity. The complaint in the complaint dated 18.05.2015 had stated that the neutral wire transmitted by the petitioner to their house had been broken. He duly informed the department of this fact. The electricity department however, did not pay any heed to his complaint. On 19.05.2015, wife of Firtu Ram Lahre switched on the cooler at about 12.00 noon and due to the electric current flowing through it she got electrocuted due to the electric current which was leaking in the cooler which was due to the snapping of the neutral wire she become unconscious and was immediately taken to the hospital but she was declared brought dead in the hospital. A police complaint was lodged with PS Kharsia and the post mortem report was also got done. In the post mortem report the cause of the death was death due to electric current. The husband and her children has alleged that there was a deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner and claimed a compensation to the tune of Rs. 16,77,000/- along with litigation expenses.
3. The petitioner contested the complaint, wherein it has been stated that she died due her own negligence as she did not take any precaution. They also took the plea that their responsibility was till the supply points to the consumer and that the consumer has never informed about the breaking of the neutral wire to the department and the documents to this effect was forged and fabricated.
4. Parties lead their evidence before the District Forum and the District Forum rejected all the contentions of the petitioner. The District Forum on the issue whether the petitioner was duly informed of the breaking of the neural wire, relied on the document dated 18.05.2015 whereby the Consumer of the electricity has duly informed the department about the snapping of the neutral wire. The District Forum has observed in the order that the petitioner had never disputed the genuineness of the stamp on the document dated 18.05.2015 and also did not produce any evidence to show that the document was not genuine and manufactured one. As regards deficiency in service, the District Forum has considered Rule 5.5 and 5.6 of the Chhattisgarh State Electricity Supply Code 2011 and held that it was the duty of the petitioner to get the broken wire repaired after getting the information and granted the following relief:
"The complaint of complainants is hereby allowed against the non-applicant and passed the following orders:
The non-applicants/ opposite party is hereby directed to pay amount of Rs. 5,58,000/- on account of compensation due to deficiency in service to the complainant within a period of 30 days.
The non-applicant/ opposite party is hereby directed to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum with effect from the date of institution of complainant viz., with effect from 04.05
