The power distribution company has a duty to maintain power lines, prevent accidents, and compensate victims under the Electricity Act, 2003.

ORDER :

Noushad Ali, President

The opposite parties - AP Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited have filed this appeal against the Order dated 29.2.2016 in CC No. 2 of 2014 passed by the District Consumer Forum-II, Visakhapatnam, directing them to pay to the respondents a sum of Rs. 2,00,000 on account of the death of their son in electrocution.

2. The Respondents’ son Navdeep who was two years old while playing at his grandfather’s house at Padmanagar Colony, Visakhapatnam accidentally came into contact with an electrical pole and sustained injuries due to the electricity passing through the pole. He was rushed to King George Hospital and was unfortunately declared dead. A crime was registered in FIR No. 153/13 dated 9.6.2013 at the I-Town Police Station. The respondents filed the complaint in question before the Forum claiming compensation alleging that the death was caused due to the negligence of the appellants in maintaining the power lines.

3. The appellants, while denying negligence, took the stand that maintenance of power supply was the responsibility of the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation; therefore no liability can be claimed against them. They contended that there was negligence on the part of the respondents as they did not take care of the child.

4. The Forum, considering the evidence on record, rejected the contentions of the appellants and allowed the complaint. The Forum has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,00,000 as compensation and Rs. 3,000 as costs.

5. In this appeal Mr. M. Ravindra, Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants contended that the Forum committed an error in ignoring the fact that the responsibility to maintain electrical lines squarely lies on the Municipal Corporation and without impleading the Corporation, the claim of the respondents is not maintainable. There is no merit in the contention. The appellant is the Power Distribution Company and the responsibility to establish and also to maintain the power lines squarely lies on them under the Electricity Act, 2003. It may be true that since the Municipal Corporation is a local body which provides street lights might have taken the responsibility to operate the system but their responsibility is limited only to maintain the street lights. Therefore the appellants cannot take any excuse by shifting their responsibility to the Municipal Corporation.

6. The Honourable Supreme Court of India in Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board v. Shail Kumar and Others, I (2002) ACC 271 (SC)=I (2002) SLT 149=2002 (2) ALD 4 (SC), held in Paras 7 and 8 as follows:

7. “It is an admitted fact that the responsibility to supply electric energy in the particular locality was statutorily conferred on the Board and if the energy so transmitted causes injury or death of a human being, who gets unknowingly trapped into, the primary liability to compensate the sufferer, is that of the suppliers of the electric energy. So long as the voltage of electricity transmitted through the wires is potentially of dangerous dimension, the managers of its supply have the added duty to take all safety measures to prevent escape of such energy or to see that the wire snapped would not remain live on the road as users of such road would be under peril. It is no defence on the part of the management of the Board that somebody committed mischief by siphoning off such energy of his private property and that the electrocution was from such diverted line. It is the look out of the managers of the supply system to prevent such pilferage by installing necessary devices. At any rate, if any live wire got snapped and fell on the public road, the electric current there on should automatically have been disrupted. Authorities manning such dangerous commodities have extra duty to chalk out measures to prevent such mishaps.

8. Even assuming that all such measures have been adopted, a person undertaking an activity involving hazardous or risk exposure to human life is liable under law of torts to compe