ORDER

Krishnamurthy B. Sangannavar, Presiding Member.—This is an Appeal filed under Section 41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 by OPs aggrieved by the Order dated 01.09.2022 passed in Consumer Complaint No.92/2021 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bagalkot (for short, the District Commission).

2. The Parties to this Appeal will be referred to as the rank assigned to them by the District Commission

3. The Commission examined the impugned order, grounds of Appeal, Appeal papers and heard learned counsels. Now the point that arises for consideration of this Commission would be:

Whether impugned order dated 01.09.2022 passed in CC No.92/2021 does call any interference for the grounds set out in the Appeal Memorandum?

4. The brief facts of the case of the Complainant before the DCDRC would be stated as follows:

The complainant is the owner of the land bearing Re-survey No.280/4B(now-R.S No.280/5) to an extent of 3 Acre 19 guntas and this land is irrigated through bore-well with submersible pump set having drip pipelines and in the said land, he had availed electric service from OP to generate his submersible pump set with mono block pump set to the bore-well. He had grown pomegranate trees in his land investing huge amount. The trees are of 7 years age started yielding fruits from the age of 3 years, he had grown 15 tons of Pomegranate getting earnings of Rs.11 to 12 lakhs. On 23.02.2020 at about 1 pm due to short circuit in the over head electric line, spark fell on the land, where pomegranate trees were grown and as a result, all trees came under fire within few minutes burnt causing huge loss. He was unable to extinguish the fire due to electric short circuit. In the said incident, he has lost his 3 acres, 19 guntas of live pomegranate tree, drip pipeline, starter box and wiring were also burnt and he sustained loss of 15 tons pomegranate fruits and 1,320 trees aged about 7 years worth of Rs. 14,60,700/-. HOPCOMS, Lalbag, Bangalore, Department of Horticulture certified under a letter dated 23.07.2020 per kg rate of Pomegranate in the month of February, 2020 was Rs.97.38 which comes to Rs.14,60,700/-. Besides had sustained loss of Rs. 5,00,000/- for burning of drip pipeline, starter box, wiring and also sustained future loss of income for 4 years due to negligence on the part of OP.

5. OP had contested the complaint case, contending complaint is not maintainable. However, admits electric connection under RR No. 49783 to the complainant is nothing to do with the alleged incident. OP denied growing of pomegranate trees 7 years ago and had denied loss to the tune of Rs.14,60,700/- and Rs.5 lakhs as stated. Further contending as per section 161 of Electricity Act 2003, the Electrical Inspector is the competent Authority to inspect and accordingly, Deputy Electrical Inspector who is the officer of State had visited the spot and submitted a report which discloses no negligence on the part of OP and therefore, no deficiency in service could be attributable on the part of OP. The Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

In view of rival contentions of the parties to the complaint, DCDRC held an enquiry and on appreciation of all the materials on record held complaint is maintainable and he is entitled for compensation of Rs.6,06,250/- for loss of pomegranate tree and Rs.1 lakh towards loss of drip pipeline, starter box, live wiring and further held complainant is entitled for Rs.18,25,000/- towards future loss of income and Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.2,000/- towards cost of the proceedings, which shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a on Rs.6,06,250/- and Rs.1 lakh and for non-compliance, OP to pay interest on such amount at the rate of 12% p.a till realisation. It is this order assailed in this Appeal, contending DCDRC has failed to notice section 161 and 162 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Further contending DCDRC without considering report of the Deputy Electrical Inspe