JUDGMENT :

This first appeal under Section 96 CPC has been filed by appellant-defendant JVVNL (hereafter `the JVVNL’) against the judgment and decree dated 28-3-2003 passed by the District Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur in suit No.62/1998, whereby and whereunder the suit under the Indian Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 was decreed for compensation of Rs.5,57,000/-with interest @ 9% per annum to plaintiffs on account of death of deceased Bishna Ram due to electrocution.

2. The facts of the case are that respondents plaintiffs (hereinafter 'plaintiffs') wife and sons of deceased Bishna Ram filed a civil suit claiming compensation on account of death of Bishna Ram, aged 32 years, who died on 23-6-1997 due to electrocution, while he was going to his agricultural field with bullock cart and calf near Dayal's agricultural field electricity wire of 11,000 KV was broken and lying on road due to which deceased suffered current and died on spot. Along with him Bulls and calf also died. It was averred that the deceased Bishna Ram was an agriculturists and due to negligence on the part of defendants he died, hence, the suit was filed for compensation to the tune of Rs.23,06,000/-.

3. On issuing notices JVVNL filed written statement on 18-12-1998, which was amended on 16-8-2002. They denied allegation of negligence and stated that no wire was broken as no such information was received about breaking of electricity wire of 11000 KV. Further their contention is that as soon as electric wire breaks, electricity supply disconnects automatically. There was no information to department about the fatal accident. It was stated that if due to natural calamity electricity wire breaks, the department cannot be held responsible. However, they did not deny the factum of death of deceased due to electrocution. It was stated that suit for compensation cannot be filed for death of bull, buffalo, calf etc. therefore, the same be dismissed.

4. On the basis of pleadings of parties the trial court framed five issues. First, whether on 23-6-1997 in morning while Bishna ram was going to his field in village Hattupura, near the field of Dayal wire of 11000 kV line was broken due to which Bishnaram died along with bulls, buffalo, and calves? Second, whether Bishnaram died due to negligence of defendants in maintaining electricity line? Third, whether plaintiffs are entitled for compensation of Rs.23,06,000/-? Fourth, Relief? Fifth, whether plaintiff’s suit under Fatal Accident Act, for compensation for death of bulls, buffaloes and calf is maintainable?

Plaintiffs examined PW1. Lada Devi, PW2. Heera, PW.3 Ratan Lal, PW.4 Govind Singh, PW.5 Dayal, PW.6 Dr. Salil Maheshwari and PW.7 Binjaram and exhibited documents. Defendants examined one witness DW.1 Ashok Kumar Gupta.

5. The trial court considered oral and documentary evidence led by both parties. PW.1 Lada devi in her statement stated that while she reached on spot she saw that electricity wire was lying on road, her husband was lying on road and smoke was oozing and there was bad smell. Her husband died due to negligence of the lineman. Her statement found support from evidence of other witnesses. PW.3 Ratan Lal stated that as soon as bulls stepped on wire current passed and all Bishnaram, bulls, buffalo, calf died due to electrocution. Dr. Salil Maheshwari verified the post mortem report (Ex.3) and stated that Bishnaram died because of electrocution. The trial court relying on judgment in case of Parvati Devi Vs. Commissioner of Police Delhi [(2000)3 SCC 754] decided the issue No.1 in favour of plaintiffs. Since there was no evidence regarding natural calamity for breaking electricity wire, the issue No.2 was decided in favour of plaintiffs. The trial Court in absence of any proof of source of income of deceased, assessed the income of deceased as Rs.4000/-per month, and deducting 1/3rd for personal expenses, assessed an amount of Rs.32,000/-per year, and applying the multiplier of 17, assessed the compensation of Rs.5,4