Back
2026 Supreme(Guj) 294
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J. C. DOSHI, J.
Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Ltd & Anr. – Appellant
Versus
Karsanbhai Tapubhai Nagar (Saraniya) & Ors. – Respondent
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 196 of 2012 With R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 106 of 2012
Decided on : 18-06-2026
Important Points
Subject
Tort Law - Liability for Dangerous Activities
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Compensation - Assessment of damages - Award of compensation must be based on objective criteria rather than ad-hoc estimations - Courts are mandated to apply systematic methodologies, such as those utilized in motor accident claims, to determine just and fair compensation - Inadequately calculated awards require remand for proper determination based on established legal principles. (Paras 13, 14, 15)
Facts of the case:
A minor engaged in manual scavenging suffered fatal electrocution after coming into contact with a loose hanging electric wire. The survivors filed a civil suit for compensation. The trial court awarded a fixed sum, which was challenged by the service provider on the basis that illegal construction and third-party intervention contributed to the accident.
Findings of Court:
The court held that the provider is strictly liable for maintaining electrical lines safely. Arguments regarding unauthorized construction or third-party negligence are insufficient to excuse liability for injuries resulting from inherently dangerous operations. The court further concluded that the trial court's award was arbitrary and lacked the necessary calculations for just compensation.
Issues: The primary issues were whether the principle of absolute liability applies to electrical fatalities involve third-party elements, and whether the quantum of compensation was determined by an appropriate, reasoned, and consistent methodology.
Ratio Decidendi: Entities engaged in hazardous activities are governed by the rule of absolute liability. This liability is independent of proof of negligence and arises from the risk inherent in the operation. Consequently, compensation for resulting deaths must be measured by empirical legal standards rather than arbitrary quantification to ensure the objective of just and fair restitution is met.
Result: The appeal filed by the defendant was dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the claimants was allowed. The case was remanded to the trial court for a recalculation of compensation within a specific timeframe.
For the Appellant : MR SP HASURKAR(345)
For the Respondent: MR P J YAGNIK(1004)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the determination of liability in cases of wrongful death caused by electrocution involving hazardous activities. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. the doctrine of strict and absolute liability applicable to enterprises engaged in inherently dangerous activities like electricity supply. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. the requirement for judicial determination of just and fair compensation using objective standards like the motor vehicle act. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT :
J. C. DOSHI, J.
1. Mr. Munna, a 15 year old boy, who was working as a garbage-picker, on 27.09.2004 was roaming in the Aslali area and was picking the garbage, at that time, he came in contact with a loose hanging electric wire and received an electric shock and died due to electrocution on the spot.
2. The parents and two minor brothers of the deceased – Munna preferred the Special Civil Suit No.282 of 2007 before the 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur seeking compensation of Rs.7 lakhs with interest inter alia on the aforesaid facts.
3. The learned trial Court, after framing the issues and permitting parties to lead the evidence, was pleased to grant the compensation in tune of Rs.2 lakhs with 8% interest from the date of the suit till realization.
4. Being aggrieved, the Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. (UGVCL, for short) preferred the appeal and on being served, the original plaintiffs had filed the cross-objection.
5. Heard learned advocate for the respective parties.
6. It is noticeable that the 15 year old boy lost his life while salvaging the garbage. It was the case of the UGVCL that some illegal construction took place and illegal electricity was fixated there and contributed in cause of death of minor boy.
7. The learned trial Court disbelieved the contention and granted a compensation of Rs.2 lakhs.
8. This Court in a catena of the judgments has decided the issue in fray. The recent among them is in First Appeal No.1606 of 2010, Paschim Gujarat Vij Co.Ltd v. Master Jayendrasinh Mangubha Jadeja , wherein the relevant observations are in para 9 to 12, which reads as under:-
“9. In this factual background, let refer the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of M.C. Mehta v/s. Union of India [AIR 1987 SC 1086 ], whereby the Hon’ble Apex Court extended principles of strict liability involved in case of Rylands v. Fletcher, 1868 3 HL 330 and held it to be absolute liability. In that case, claim for compensation was sought on behalf of persons who had suffered consequent to escape of oleum gas from the units of Sriram Foods & Fertilizers Industries. The Honble Apex Court has laid down the law as regards consequences of accidents where inherently dangerous activities are carried on, which reads as under:-
“The principle of absolute liability was laid down whereby liability was made absolute i.e., strict liability sans defences. The observations of the Apex Court at Para 31 is self-explanatory and reads as follows: "....We would therefore hold that where an enterprise is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity and harm results to anyone on account of an accident in the operation of such hazardous or inherently dangerous activity resulting, for example, in escape of toxic gas the enterprise is strictly and absolutely liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is not subject to any of the exceptions which operate vis-avis the tortious principle of strict liability under the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher."
10. In H.S.E.B. v/s. Ram Nath [2004 (5) SCC 793], the Honble Apex Court again reiterated extension of principle of absolute liability in case where liability was sought to be disowned by the Power Supply Company by contending that the unauthorized structure near the electric line hand contributed to the accident. In para 6, the Honble Apex Court held as under:-
"6. The appellants are carrying on a business which is inherently dangerous. If a pe
