|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carelessly drawn, low slung, damaged, high-tension power supply lines have been responsible for several fatal accidents as well as damage to property in different parts of the country. What is most unfortunate in most of such cases is that the tragedies were not only easily avoidable and but could well have been averted if only the service provider had paid heed to the complaints of consumers about sparks in wires or snapped supply lines. Equally condemnable is the attitude of the service providers after any such mishap. They prefer to spend money on their standing counsel and wage a long legal battle to escape their liability rather than take responsibility for their actions or inaction and compensate the victims. Take the case of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation vs Mani Thomas (2006) II CPJ 245 (NC). Here an entire plantation was gutted due to negligence on the part of the corporation. Apparently, the corporation had left two loose wires, hanging at just eight feet over the plantation. The naked wires came in contact with each other and the resultant short circuit led to the fire. The corporation, however, did not compensate the consumer when he brought the matter to its notice, forcing him to approach the consumer court for relief. Even here, the corporation opposed the idea of compensation and when the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission awarded damages to the consumer, appealed against it, The appeal was, however, dismissed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. Similarly, in a case decided way back in 1994, (Sub-divisional officer, HSEB vs Prem Lal Saini FA no 569 of 1993), the Haryana State Electricity Board ignored the farmer’s repeated complaints regarding the power line. The supply line to his tubewell, which passed through his field, sparked continuously and the farmer feared that the sparks might cause a fire. Sure enough, the sparks set the field on fire, destroying the harvested as well as the unharvested crop. Here again, the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission awarded compensation to the farmer for the loss suffered by him. In yet another case, a high-tension wire fell on a low-tension wire at the residence of Ms Urmila Devi, leading to the death of her husband. The compensation awarded by the Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to Urmila Devi was a meager Rs 2 lakh. But the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation was unwilling to accept even this and filed an appeal against the judgement before the national commission, which dismissed it on the ground that the appeal was barred by limitation. (Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation vs Urmila Devi (2008) II CPJ 362 (NC). Instead of wasting
public money on avoidable litigation, power supply and distribution
companies would do well to pay more attention to safety in the power
supply and distribution network. And if despite that an accident does
occur, they should have a well laid out compensation policy that is
just and fair and ensures payment of damages without any delay. Or
else in future, they may well end up paying not just compensation but
also punitive damages.
|
|||
|
|
|||
