SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER Vs. RAM SARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision petition, there is challenge to order dated 28.11.2011, passed by Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panchkula (short, "State Commission"). Along with it, an application seeking condonation of delay of 30 days has also been filed.

(2.) Brief facts are that respondent no.1/complainant got installed a transformer at his own expenses at the tubewell connection. The said transformer got burnt on 16.3.2011. Despite several requests made to the petitioner/opposite party same was not repaired. Rather respondent no.1 was informed that transformer in question was purchased by him at his own expenses with the warranty of six years, therefore, petitioner has no concern with it. On being approached, respondent no.2, (contractor)/ OP No.3 informed respondent no.1that warranty of the transformer was for two years. After lapse of the warranty, petitioner is liable to maintain the same. Thus, respondent no.1 filed a complaint for directing the petitioner to install new transformer at his tube well and to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment as well as Rs.5,000/- as cost of proceedings.

(3.) Petitioner/OP Nos.1 and 2, in their written statement admitted the fact that respondent had applied for tubewell connection under self-execution scheme and all the material which is necessary for releasing the electricity supply to the tubewell has to be purchased by the respondent as well as contractor. The department only has to release the electric supply to the tubewell. Hence, there is no liability of the petitioner.