M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the appellants/opposite parties praying for the direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.2 lakhs towards agricultural loss, to pay Rs.2 lakhs towards mental agony, sufferings, to pay Rs.10,0000/- towards medical expenses and to pay Rs.2,000/- towards cost. The District Forum allowed the complaint, against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.14.02.2008 in C.C.10/2006. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 08.04.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the either counsels and perused the documents, as well as the order of the District Forum, this Commission made the following order: The opposite parties are the appellants.
(2.) The respondent/complainant approached the District Forum, Erode, seeking a direction that he should be given service connection on the basis of well changing as well as he is entitled to a compensation of Rs.4 lakhs, not only for loss of agricultural income, but also for mental agony, since the opposite parties have failed to give service connection, though he had applied for service connection on 06.11.89, as well paid a sum of Rs.50/- on 06.05.2003 for well changing, which should be construed as deficiency in service.
(3.) The opposite parties, admitting the application given by the complainant on 6.11.89, resisted the complaint, contending that the verification revealed a joint service connection was given for the common well already and therefore, cancelled the application, that at present, as per the direction issued by the Chief Engineer, they are willing to give service connection, based upon seniority and as such, since the seniority of the complainants application has not reached, there is no question of giving service connection out of turn, failure cannot be faulted as deficiency in service, praying for the dismissal of the case.;