STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CIRCUIT BENCH NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/CB2/27/A/47/2018 MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO.LTD.

PRESENT ADDRESS - THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER TAH SAONER DIST.

NAGPUR,MAHARASHTRA.

MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO.LTD.

PRESENT ADDRESS - THROUGH ITS DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER TAH SAONER DIST.

NAGPUR,MAHARASHTRA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus GIRDHARI VITHALRAO DHAPODKAR PRESENT ADDRESS - R/O. PLOT NO. 85, NEAR CHITRASHALA MANDIR PREMNAGAR, NAGPUR-440 002,MAHARASHTRA.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. KALYANI KAPSE , PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MS. SHAILA D. WANDHARE , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

ADV. YOGESH RAHATE FOR THE APPELLANT.

FOR THE RESPONDENT:

ADV. S.A. DEOLE FOR THE RESPONDENT.

DATED: 09/10/2025

ORDER

(Delivered on 09/10/2025)

Per Mrs Kalyani Kapse, Hon’ble Presiding Member

1. The present appeal is preferred by the Appellants namely Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. (MSEDCL) through its Executive Engineer, and Deputy Executive Engineer, Nagpur against the Respondent namely Girdhari Vithhalrao Dhapodkar, Nagpur under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. (for the sake of brevity “The Act”)

2. The learned Additional District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum (The Forum) at Nagpur has partly allowed the complaint filed under section 12 of the Act bearing No.CC/17/12 by order dated 03/01/2018 and hence this appeal.

3. The brief facts of the appeal mentioned herein below. (Parties are hereinafter referred as per their original nomenclature i.e. the present Respondent as Complainant and present Appellant MSEDCL as Opposite Party for better appreciation)

4. The Complainant made request for installation of transformer which was not done in spite of many complaints. Opposite party denied the claim and submitted that though the Transformer was away from the Agricultural Land of the Complainant/Respondent still the electric supply with possible voltage was provided. The leamed Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nagpur has partly allowed the Complaint

5. It is the case of Complainant that the complainant made a request for installation of Transformer, which was not done in spite of the complaints dtd. 11/11/2016 and 15/11/2016 to the Appellants Nos. 1 and 2 respectively. The Complainant has suffered the loss as he had taken the loan and consequently damages to the tune of Rs.6.00 lacs towards the plantation and Rs.1.00 Lac towards the mental torture, agony and Rs.25,000/- towards cost of the proceedings was claimed.

6. Notices were served to Opponents. By way of Written Version (W.S.) dated 25/04/2017 Opponents by general denials and defences restricted the claim of the Complainant. In reply Opposite Party submitted that the allegations regarding the causing of loss to the plantation is absolutely false. Opponents further submitted that the Complainant is not having sufficient water in the well, the land being stony. It is further submitted that though the Transformer was away from the Agricultural Land of the Complainant/Respondent still the electric supply with possible voltage was provided. All allegations that electric pump was not working and that the Complainant/Respondent suffered any loss is absolutely false. It is further submitted that there is no deficiency in service.

7. The leamed Forum, thereafter recorded the evidence led by the Complainant as well as Opposite party. The learned Forum, also went through the documents filed by both the parties as well as written notes of arguments.

8. After appreciating the oral and documentary evidence the leamed Forum, has partly allowed the Complaint thereby granting the compensation of Rs.4.50,000/- on account of loss of crops and mental torture, and Rs.5000/- towards the cost of proceedings. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present Appeal is being filed on the following Grounds

9. The other ground of appeal is that the learned Forum ought to have considered that the provisions o