TEJPAL Vs. HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of two appeals - Appeal No. 769 of 1995 filed by the complainant Tejpal and others and Appeal No. 776 of 1995 filed by the Haryana State Electricity Board, against the impugned order dated 13.11.1995 passed by the learned District Consumer Forum, Gurgaon, whereby a sum of Rs. 15,540/ - has been awarded by way of compensation to the complainants on account of deficiency in service on the part of the Haryana State Electricity Board. The complainants approached the District Consumer Forum, Gurgaon, with the grievance that they were progressive farmers and had sown vegetables like water -melon, cucumber, melon, tomato, chillies and mint etc. in 1995, but as the transformer supplying electricity to their tubewell got burnt on 17.5.1995, the crops sown by them got damaged due to non -supply of water in the scorching heat of summer thereby causing loss of about Rs. 45,000/ - to them. In their reply, the Electricity Board pleaded that no doubt the transformer in question got burnt on 22.5.1995 and the matter was promptly reported by the S.D.O. concerned to the Chief Engineer who immediately ordered installation of a new transformer; but as the transformer of the desired capacity of 100 KW was not available in the store it took about a week in installing the new transformer and ultimately the electricity was restored on 4.6.1995. Thus, there was no deficiency in service on the part of the HSEB. However, the learned District Consumer Forum, after considering the evidence produced by the parties with regard to the repeated reminders for the restoration of electricity and the quantum of loss supplied by the complainants etc., came to the conclusion that - "So, the loss is assessed as under : Crop Net profit per acre Area under cultivation Net loss Chillies Tomatos 10,000/ - 10,000/ - 4Kls

(2.) ACRES 2,500/ - 10,000/ - Melon 5,000/ - 11/2 acres 2,500/ - Cucumber 5,000/ -

(3.) KB . 300/ - Total 15540/ -" It is against this order that the complainants have come up in appeal for the enhancement of compensation whereas the H.S.E.B. has filed the appeal for the setting aside of the impugned order. 2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and find that the order passed by the learned District Forum is wholly in accordance with the evidence available on record and there is no legal infirmity either in the approach to the problem or in the assessment of the loss suffered by the complainants. It has been established on record that it was after full two weeks that the electricity supply was restored and due to non - irrigation of the crops in the hot summer of May and June, they got damaged. So far as the assessment of loss is concerned, the amount has been correctly quantified. Under the circumstances, both the appeals are dismissed as the ends of justice stand adequately met with the compensation already granted to the complainants. Appeals dismissed.