Karnataka

Bidar

CC/87/2013

Smt. Gujamma W/o Issac (Shankar) Mapurkar - Complainant(s)

Versus

GESCOM - Opp.Party(s)

RAJKUMAR K

04 Jul 2016

ORDER

::BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AT BIDAR::

 

 

                                                                                                         C.C.No. 87/2013

 

                                                                                              Date of filing: 21/12/2013

 

                                                                                        Date of disposal : 02/07/2016.

 

 

P R E S E N T:-              (1) Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata,

                                                                                         B.A., LL.B

                                                                                                       President.

    

                                         (2) Shri. Shankrappa  (Halipurgi),

                                                                      B.A.LL.B.

                                                                                  Member.

                               

COMPLAINANT:          Smt. Gujamma, w/o Late Issac @ Shanker Mapurkar,                                                           

                                Age :48 years,  Occ: household,             

                                       R/o village Chillargi, Tq & Dist.Bidar.

                                     

                                   (By Shri. Rajkumar K. Advocate)

 

 

                                                      VERSUS

 

OPPONENT/S   :-           1. The Managing Director,

                                         Gulbarga Electricity Supplying Co.

                                            Gulbarga.

                                

                                    2.  The Executive Engineer (El),

                                            Gulbarga Electricity Supplying Co.

                                            Bidar Division, Bidar.

 

                                     

                                        ( O.P.No.1&2 By Shri. R.K.Ganure, Advocate)

                                                                                                                                                 

 

 

 

::   J UD G M E N T  : :

 

 

 

By Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata, President.

 

    The complainant is before us with complaint U/S.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986, seeking compensation on account of death of her husband by name late Issac @ Shanker Mapurkar due to electrocution and on the refusal of the O.Ps to compensate the L.R.S. of the victim adequately.

2.             The complainant is the sole applicant here, in spite of the fact that, as per her statement before the police in Ex.P.2 dt. 30-12-2012, she is having four male and two female progenies.  The case could have been primarily dismissed due to non-joinder of necessary parties, but no such defence has been taken by the O.Ps and a trial in the Consumer Court being of summary nature, the nitti-gritties of the general law need not to be followed in spirit.

3.        The complainant avers that, her husband by name late Issac @ Shanker Mapurkar of village Chillargi, Tq. & Dist.Bidar was 55 years old at the time of death and was working as a village Post Master ( Grameena Dak Sevak Post Master) from 09-11-1978 to 29-12-2012 and his date of birth was 31-03-1950 as per the certificate produced as Ex.P.6 by the complainant ).  The deceased was drawing a net salary of Rs. 6,774/- P.M. at the time of death and was the sole bread winner of the family.

4.             As per the narration of the complainant, the family was inhabitant of village Chillargi, Tq/Dist.Bidar and their house was tinned (G.I.Sheet) roofed house in the village.  As is evident from the sketch, prepared by the Section Officer, O & M-III section, GESCOM-Sub Division, Bidar in Ex.R.9, a L.T.2 electrical wire transmission line runs over the G.I.Sheeted house, wherefrom a service wire provides power to the house of the complainant.

5.          During the morning of 30-12-2012 at about 8 A.M. the complainant went to the bath room of the house to fetch water and got an electrical shock, wherefore she shouted aloud.   Her husband, the deceased came to her rescue, saved her but himself received massive electrical shock, ultimately causing his death.  Of course, we see a better clarification in the lady’s statement in Ex.R.11 to the effect that, she found a wire fallen in the bath room and she lifting the wire had thrown upon the G.I. sheet.  The G.I.sheets were already  containing electricity which caused her the shock.  Her husband, hearing her panic sound, separated the wire from her clutch, and then himself tried to throw back the wire on the roof, in the process getting electric shock, fatal to his life.  The narration further goes on that     ( as per Ex.P.2) hearing the commotions neighbours such as Abraham s/o Amruth and Somanna etc. arrived at the spot, rescued her husband from contact of the live electric wire, after which, he fell down having injuries on the left hand.  The complainant, as narrated further with the help of her son Raju and Mohan, brought the still alive Issac to Bidar Govt. Hospital, on arrival where he was found to be dead.

6.               It appears from the documents at Ex.P.1 & P.2, on receipt of a MLC report at about 10.15 a.m. on 30-12-2012, the P.S.I. Janawada P.S. arrived at the hospital at about 10.30 a.m., registered U.D.R. no.18/2012 u/s. 174 Cr.P.C.,(Ex.P.1), recorded the statement of the complainant vide Ex.P.2 and conducted an inquest vide Ex.P.3.  Later, the body was subjected to post mortem (Ex.P.4), wherein, the cause of death has been recorded as “ Due to shock as a result of electrocution”.  The complainant had filed a representation to the O.Ps vide Ex.P.7 with no reprieve for which she is before this Forum, claiming compensation as a consumer.

7.          The respondents after Court notice have appeared through a counsel, filed their versions on 29-03-2014 along with supporting documents (copies) as Ex.R.1 to R.11, most of which are replicas of the complainant’s documents.  All the documents relied by the parties are listed distinctly at the end of this order.

8.                To quote the defence in a nutshell, though the respondents admit about the death of Isac due to electrocution, they deny about the running of live electrical wire on the roof of the house of the deceased          ( Fie-their own sketch in Ex.R.9).  The respondents deny their responsibility of safe electrical transmission, even though it is evident that, the service wire as per Ex.R.9, runs touching the G.I. sheet roof of the complainant’s house.  The Respondents are further blind to the statements of Sri.Babu Pawar, their own officer as recorded in Ex.R.10 of the case.  As a whole, it can be surmised that, the respondent, a Govt. Entity is insensitive towards the life and safety of citizens, out of whose paid taxes, they draw their pays and perks and enjoy a comfortable life.  Why could not the power was not supplied through an underground cable but a live service wire?

9.           In furtherance of his case, the complainant has submitted decisions of higher Courts as detailed underneath:

 

1.  IV (2008) CPJ 139 N.C.
2. III (2010) CPJ 198 N.C
3. 2013(2) CPR 184 N.C.
4. 2013 (2) CPR 188 N.C.
5. 2013 (2) CPR 133 N.C.

In the cases, stated supra the Honb’le National Commission has been pleased to fix the onus on the electrical supply companies (organisations) to ensure the life, safety, etc. Of the citizens and animals in equivocal terms, and we have no hesitation to hold that, the Respondent’s negligent act was responsible to cause the death of Isac, the late husband of the complainant.

10.              Then delving into the issues to fix a proper compensation to theL.R.S. of the deceased, we find, though wrongly the complainant has claimed her husband to be 55 years of old, as per the departmental certificate produced by her at Ex.P.6, the deceased was born on 31-03-1950.  Thence  he was about 61 years old at the time of death, for which a notional multiplier of 5 at best could be applied in the case, as, as per the actuarial figure the life expectancy is 65 years in Indian Standards.

11.               As per Ex.P.5, filed by the complainant, the take home pay of the deceased was Rs. 6,774/- out of which 1/3^rd would have to be deducted as his personal expenditure amounting to Rs. 2,258/-.    That, leaves a residue of Rs. 4,516/- as his contribution to the family, comprising of the wife, four sons and two daughters altogether seven members.  The appropriate multiplicand then would work out to be Rs. 2,70,960/- to be apportioned among the seven L.R./S. Of the deceased as per section 27 of the India Succession Act., the family professing Christian religion, after the complainant submits the age proof, I.D. proof of her progenies at a later stage, and that issue is presently left open.

12.             Considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated supra and giving our anxious thoughts to the principal of “ Ex debito justitae”, we hold that, the respondents are grossly negligent in maintaining the appropriate electrical transmission.

13.             However, we cannot be indifferent  to observe that, as is revealed in Ex.R.10, the deceased being a Post Master an averagely educated person, had no business to put his hands on a live electric wire to throw the same on the roof after rescuing his wife from electrocution.   He may therefore be safely held to indulge into contributory negligence to the extent of 50% and hence the calculation of compensation in the preceding paragraph would amount to Rs. 1,35,480/- and has to be apportioned among the L.R.S of the deceased at a later stage subject to the proof(s) to be produced as stated above.  Therefore taking into consideration all the aspects of the case, we pass the following:

 

 

: :   ORDER : :

 

1.  The complaint is allowed in part.

 

              (b)  The O.Ps are directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,35,480/- in this Court as compensation to the L.R.S. of the victim together with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of accident i.e. 30-12-2012, till the date of realisation. 

 

               (c)    It is made clear, there would be a separate order at a later stage, apportioning the amount of compensation after the deposit made, in terms of provisions of Indian Succession Act.

 

               (d)    The O.Ps are directed to pay a separate sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant ( wife of the deceased) as loss of consortium.

 

               (e)  The O.Ps are further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- each to the progenies (children of the deceased) as loss of filial love and affection.

 

              (f) A separate sum of Rs. 10,000/- would be paid by the O.Ps to the complainant towards the cost of performance of obsequities.

 

             (g)  A further sum of Rs. 5,000/- are to be paid by the O.Ps to the complainant towards litigation expenses.

             (h)  We are dismayed to observe that, the GESCOM due to it’s incalcitrancy is the biggest contributor to electrical accidents, deaths, maimings disabilities and untold sufferings to the public at large.  It’s fixation of poles, running of transmission lines, insulations and fittings etc.  are  of primitive nature, affecting the life(s) safety of the citizenry.  Therefore, acting u/s. 14 (hb) of the C.P. Act., we direct that, the O.Ps. deposit a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- towards the head of “Consumer Welfare Fund”in this Forum.

 

1. Last but not the least, this Court is not vested with a wide

Power as that of a High Court or Supreme Court.  But, we would appreciate, if the Dept. Of Energy of Govt. Of Karnataka, creates a separate fund to grant ex-gratia relief(s) to all electrocution victims at the threshold.

 

10. A copy of this order be transmitted to the Secretary, Dept of

Energy, Govt. Of Karnataka, Vidhansoudha Bengaluru-560001 for an equitable, people oriented consideration.

 

11. A copy also be transmitted to Asst. Director, Publicity and

Information, near Rly. Station, Bidar for wide publicity in print and electronic media for consumer awareness.

 

• Four weeks time is granted to fulfil this order.

 

 

 

   ( Typed to our dictation then corrected, signed by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this  2^nd  day of July-2016 )

 

 

 

 

   Sri. Shankrappa H.                                               Sri. Jagannath Prasad                                

           Member                                                                         President

                                               

Documents produced by the complainant

                                                                                                                              

1.Ex.P.1- Registration of U.D.R.no.18/2012.

2.Ex.P.2- Statement of complainant before Police.

3.Ex.P.3- Inquest report u/s.174 Cr.P.C.  

4. Ex.P.4-P.M. report.

5. Ex.P.5-Salary Certificate.

6. Ex.P.6-Certificate of Supdt. of Ppost Offices regarding employment and date of birth of the deceased.

7. Ex.P.7-Representation of complainant, dt.23-10-2013.

 

 

Documents produced by the Opponents.

1. Ex.R.1-U.D.R. Registration ( akin to P.1)

2. Ex.R.2-Inquest report (akin to P.3)

3. Ex.R.3- Spot Mahazar.

4. Ex.R.4-Statement of complainant.

5.Ex.R.5- P.M. report (akin to P.4)

6.Ex.R.6-News paper cutting.

7 Ex.R.7 Report of elctricial Accident in form-A.

8 Ex.R.8-Sketch of scene of accident.

9.Ex.R.9-Statement of Sri.Babu Pawar, A.E.E.,Bidar.

10 Ex.R.10- Statement (further) of complainant

 

 

 

   Sri. Shankrappa H.                                               Sri. Jagannath Prasad                                

           Member                                                                         President