Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J,

C.R.

Appellants sued the Kerala State Electricity Board and its officer claiming damages for the alleged electrocution of their son, Shibu, on 27.7.1989. Then aged 20 years, he had studied upto SSLC and was employed in an electrical shop drawing daily wages at the rate of Rs.50/-. The plaintiffs pleaded that while the deceased and his friends, P.Ws.3 and 4, were swimming and playing with the aid of inflated rubber tube in paddy fields behind a Government U.P. School, which remained flooded due to rains, the deceased came into contact with a live electric supply line that was hanging close to water and resultantly succumbed. They attributed Shibu's death to the negligence of the defendants and claimed damages assessed as Rs.1,20,000/- towards loss of income, Rs.7,500/- for pain and suffering, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of love and affection, Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.1,500/- towards other expenses.

2. Defendants contended that the deceased was playing with his friends in the flooded paddy field and there was sufficient clearance between the wire and water level and that is why the line was not switched off. They denied the alleged negligence and pleaded that Shibu did not come into contact with the electric line. They put forth a case that Shibu died of 'Asphyxia' due to drowning and that the plaintiffs are therefore not entitled to damages from the defendants. They also disputed the plaintiffs' plea as to the age, qualification and other personal details of the deceased.

3. The trial Judge heard and recorded the testimony of P.W.2, the father of the deceased, of P.Ws.3 and 4, the friends, who were playing with Shibu at the relevant time and of P.W.1, the doctor who conducted autopsy and issued Ext.A1 post-mortem certificate. Ext.A2 SSLC certificate, Ext.A3 certificate for wages paid to Shibu by M/s. Dhanya Auto Electric Works, Muvattupuzha, Ext.A4 identity card issued to Shibu from the Town Employment Exchange, Muvattupuzha, Ext.A5 inquest report, Ext.A6 FIR and FIS and Ext.A7 photocopy of scene mahazar in the criminal case registered regarding the occurence, were admitted to evidence. The defendants did not tender any oral or documentary evidence.

4. The trial court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove that Shibu died as a result of electrocution or on account of any negligence attributable to the defendants. Holding so, the suit was dismissed, also without quantifying damages.

5. In support of this plaintiffs' appeal, it was argued that the preponderance of probabilities emanating out of the totality of the evidence on record unequivocally points only at the negligence of the defendants and the principle of strict liability applies on the facts of the case in hand. It was also argued that the inability of P.W.1, the doctor, to state with specificity, on the basis of the autopsy, as to whether it was a case of electrocution, cannot be treated as decisive, having regard to the rest of the evidence. P.Ws.3 and P.W.4 were eye witnesses whose presence was proved also by the fact that it was P.W.3, who tendered the first information statement recorded by the police within a short span of time after the alleged incident, it is pointed out. It was further argued that the impugned finding on the issue of negligence is to be reversed and damages be awarded as prayed for, in view of the legal evidence in that regard.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the defendants argued that the material evidence that clinches the issue is Ext.A1 postmortem certificate. It does not contain any burn injury being recorded and does not disclose any injury attributable to electrocution. It is pointed out that 'Asphyxia' is not shown attributable to electrocution, but only to drowning. Learned counsel very persuasively said that even if the defendants did not tender any evidence, oral or documentary, the totality of the materials on record does not lead to any conclusion other than