IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV, J.
Mrs. Rekha, W/o. Late N. Subramanya & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 1383 of 2020 (GM-KEB) C/W Writ Petition No. 53302 of 2018, Writ Petition No. 6087 of 2019
Decided On : 04-08-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 12, 21, 226 – Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 – Rule 80, 161 – Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 – Indian Electricity Rules 1952 – Rule 80, 82 – State - Compensation – Apportionment of Liability – Overhead lines - Claim of compensation - Service lines and apparatus on consumer's premises - General safety requirements, pertaining to construction, installation, protection, operation and maintenance of electric supply lines apparatus - Service lines and apparatus on consumer's premises - Provisions relating to safety and electricity supply - Power of High Courts to issue certain writs - Contributory Negligence of Child - Court had declined to entertain claim for compensation while holding that there were disputed questions of facts. However, a close scrutiny to relevant facts of said case would reveal that original suit filed claiming compensation relating to death caused due to electrical accident had come to be dismissed and only subsequently, without challenging dismissal of such suit, writ came to be filed before High Court claiming compensation on same cause of action. (Para 16).
Finding of Court: Compensation could be quantified in terms of settled principles as applied in Motor Vehicles Accidents cases. Solely on ground that determination of compensation would involve certain factual consideration that by itself will not be a ground to relegate petitioners to Civil Court as recorded supra - Taking note of law laid down in (supra), wherein court has adopted principles as applicable under Motor Vehicles Act, compensation is determined in present case following same principle.
Result: Petitions disposed off.
ORDER :
S. Sunil Dutt Yadav, J.
This Order has been divided into the following Sections to facilitate analysis :
| I | Preamble | 6 |
| II | Prayer | 7 |
| III | Facts | 8 |
| IV | Contentions of Parties | 12 |
| V | Analysis : A. Nature of Liability of Transmission Utility and Distribution Company : (a) Liability under Common Law (b) Liability under Statutory Framework imposing duty to ensure safety during transmission and distribution | 22 22 |
| B. Maintainability of Writ Petitions | 42 | |
| C. Relegation to Civil Court after granting provisional compensation | 50 | |
| D. Right to claim Compensation irrespective of payment of Exgratia/Solatium Amount | 56 | |
| E. Apportionment of Liability | 57 | |
| F. Contributory Negligence of Child | 59 | |
| VI | Conclusion | 63 |
| VII | Quantum of Compensation | 74 |
| VIII | Order | 87 |
I. PREAMBLE :
W.P.No.53302/2018, 6087/2019 and 1383/2020 all are legal actions initiated invoking writ jurisdiction claiming compensation by way of a public law remedy consequent upon injuries suffered (W.P.No.53302/2018 and 6087/2019) and death due to electrocution (W.P.No.1383/2020). As the legal basis for relief sought similar, as also the claim being made against the transmission utility and distribution companies i.e., Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited ("KPTCL" for brevity), Bengaluru Electric Supply Company ("BESCOM" for brevity) (W.P.No.53302/2018 and W.P.No.6087/2019) and Chamundeshwari Electric Supply Company ("CESCOM" for brevity) (W.P.No.1383/2020), the matters are taken up together and disposed off by a common order.
II. PRAYER :
2. Following are the relief's sought for in these petitions:
2.1. W.P.No.53302/2018
(a) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to respondent nos.1 and 2 directing them to pay compensation of Rs.90,00,000/- to the petitioner along with interest.
(b) Issue a direction to the authorities to install and maintain all the electrical wires, conductors, apparatus etc., in accordance with Electricity Act, Rules and Regulations etc., so that no untoward incident takes place in future.
2.2. W.P.No.6087/2019
(a) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent nos.1 and 2 directing them to pay compensation of Rs.90,00,000/- to the petitioner along with interest thereon.
2.3. W.P.No.1383/2020
(a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order or direction of the like nature quashing Order No.KPTCL/B7/2476/95-96 Vol. I BENGALURU dated 09.11.2017 vide Annexure-'A'.
(b) To direct the respondents to pay compensation of Rs.68,74,000/- along with applicable interest.
III. FACTS :
3. The facts giving raise to the petitions in each of the matters are as follows :
3.1. W.P.No.53302/2018
(i) The petitioner who was a student studying in IX Standard, on 19.10.2017 while carrying an iron mop stick while climbing the staircase in her residence came in contact with 11 KV Electrical line and was electrocuted and suffered grievous injuries.
(ii) LIST OF EVENTS:
| 19.10.2017 | Petitioner suffered injuries due to electrocution. |
| 06.01.2018 | Vidyaranyapura P.S. registered a First Information Report in Crime No.0007/2018 (Annexure-H - Copy of FIR; Annexure-J - Copy of complaint) |
| 17.09.2018 | Electrical Inspector submitted enquiry report (Annexure-R1 to Statement of Objections of respondent no.2) |
| 27.03.2018 | The Karnataka State Commission for Protection of Child Rights ("KSCPCR" for brevity) passed an order directing the Respondent No.2 to pay compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- and further directed the second respondent to provide robotic arm to the petitioner (Annexure-K) |
| 02.08.2018 | Representation by petitioner to BESCOM to implement the order of KSCPCR |
| 26.09.2018 | Representation addressed to the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government, Energy Department to pay compensatio |
M.C. Mehta and Another v. Union of India and Others
M.P. Electricity Board v. Shail Kumari and Others
National Commission for Protection of Child Rights and Others v. Dr. Rajesh Kumar and Others
H.S.E.B. and Others v. Ram Nath and Others
Union of India v. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar and Others
Jay Laxmi Salt Works (P) Ltd. v. State of Gujarat
Home Office v. Dorset Yacht Co. Ltd.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India reported in 1987 (1) SCR 819
Chairman, GRID Corporation of Orissa Ltd. (GRIDCO) and Others v. Smt. Sukamani Das & Another
S.D.O. Grid Corporation of Orissa Ltd. and Others v. Timudu Oram
Sarla Verma and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another
Sudhir Kumar Rana v. Surinder Singh
M.P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Abdul Rahman
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram
Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Another
Child has suffered permanent disability of 75% with amputation of left hand. Therefore, loss of earning can be determined by taking into consideration of Notional Income in terms of law.
The court can award interim compensation for injury due to electrocution under public law jurisdiction; full compensation requires evidentiary assessment in a competent court.
The court held that the respondents' gross negligence in failing to provide safety measures around the transformer led to the electrocution of a minor, warranting compensation for the victim's injuri....
The court confirmed that governmental entities can be held strictly liable for damages resulting from negligence in maintaining public safety regarding hazardous activities, including electricity sup....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the principle of res ipsa loquitur can be applied to establish negligence in cases of electrocution. The court also emphasized the liability o....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.