Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
V.SRINIVAS
Jambula Hymavathi, W/o. Late Jambula Somasekhar Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Divisional Engineer Operations, Apspdcl – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
V.SRINIVAS, J.
This regular appeal under Section 96 Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’) is directed against the decree and judgment in O.S.No.104 of 2011 dated 01.05.2014 on the file of the Court of learned I Additional District Judge at Kadapa.
2. The plaintiffs, before the Trial Court, are the appellants herein. The respondents herein are the defendants.
3. The appellants instituted the suit against the respondents claiming compensation of Rs.12,52,000/- with interest at 24% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization and for costs.
4. Before adverting to the material and evidence on record and nature of findings in the judgment of the Trial Court, it is necessary to scan through the case pleaded by the parties in their respective pleadings.
5. The case of the appellants/plaintiffs in brief in the plaint was as follows:
i). One Jambula Soma Sekhar Reddy (hereinafter called as “the deceased”) got installed an electrical motor in the land an extent of Ac.9.43 cents belongs to the appellants situated near Ragimanuthota and he cultivating the said land along with other family members.
ii). On 13.10.2008 at about 05.00 a.m., when the deceased
The court held that claims for death due to wrongful acts are governed by the Fatal Accidents Act's limitation period, specifically Article 82 of the Limitation Act.
The suit for compensation under the Fatal Accident Act must be filed within two years from the date of death, as per Article 82 of the Limitation Act.
The court upheld that minors have protections under S.6 of the Limitation Act, enabling them to file claims despite filing deadlines, particularly when negligence is established.
The court clarified that the limitation period for filing suits was extended due to the pandemic, and the Trial Court's dismissal of the suit as time barred was incorrect.
In negligence claims for death not under the Fatal Accidents Act, suits are governed by Article 113 of the Limitation Act, allowing a three-year filing period.
The court upheld the trial court's decision, ruling that the defendants could not raise a limitation defense not presented at trial, and that plaintiffs proved negligence in the electrocution case.
The duty of care owed by the Electricity Board in hazardous activities and the application of the multiplier method for determining the quantum of compensation.
Electricity suppliers are strictly liable for injuries caused by their infrastructure, regardless of negligence, and must compensate victims for losses incurred.
Electricity providers are strictly liable for accidents caused by negligence in maintaining infrastructure, with compensation calculated based on the deceased's earnings and family dependency.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
