The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principle of res ipsa loquitur, the concept of strict liability, and the duty of the electricity department to maintain electric lines as per the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956.

JUDGMENT

Sudesh Bansal, J. - This first appeal under Section 96 CPC has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 11-4-1989 passed by the District Judge Bharatpur, in Suit No. 86/1986, whereby and whereunder decreeing the suit claiming compensation under the Indian Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 allowed compensation Rs. 90,000/- to plaintiffs-claimants (hereafter the plaintiffs') against the appellant-defendant Rajasthan Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (hereafter 'the defendant') on account of death of husband and father of claimants due to electrocution.

2. The facts of the case are that respondent plaintiffs (hereafter 'the plaintiffs') filed a civil suit claiming compensation on account of accidental death of their husband and father Mohar Singh, aged 35 years, who died at the spot on 13-6-1984 at Helak gate because of electrocution, while he was going for earning his labour he met with a wire lying on road and sustained electrocution. It was averred that proper insulator was not fixed due to which while wire was broken and lying on road current was passing through, therefore, the defendant was responsible for such lapse. It was averred that the deceased was earning Rs. 15/- per day and spent for family without any expenses for himself. As such alleging negligence on the part of defendants suit was filed claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,54,000/-.

3. On issuing notices defendant filed written statement and denied the allegation of negligence and stated that there was heavy rain, thunderstorm and hailstorm in the night of 12 and 13 June, 1984, due to which the wire was broken and on receiving information about death of deceased electricity was disconnected in the area. However, they admitted the fact of accident and did not disputed the factum of death of deceased because of electrocution.

4. On the basis of pleadings of parties the trial court framed four issues. First, whether at the time of death deceased Mohar Singh, 35 years old was healthy, not suffering from any disease and was earning from agricultural labour? Second, whether broken wires were lying on road and current was passing due to negligence of officials of defendant and when Mohar Singh was going for labour at field, due to dark stepped on broken wire and stuck to it due to which he died by electrocution? Third, whether plaintiffs are entitled for compensation Rs. 1,54,000/- due to death of Mohar Singh? Fourth, Relief?

5. Plaintiffs examined three witnesses and exhibited one document Post Mortem Report (Ex. 1).

In rebuttal, defendant examined one witness Subhash Chandra Sharma, Junior Engineer and exhibited no document.

6. The trial court considered oral and documentary evidence led by both parties. PW. 1 Ramvati stated in her statements that her husband was 35 years old and was earning from labour. PW. 2 Dr. Suresh Chand stated that he conducted post mortem (Ex. 1) of Mohar Singh and all internal organs of deceased were found healthy. He further stated that cause of death was electric shock.

On the basis of such evidence of witnesses of plaintiffs and document, not rebutted by any evidence of defendant's side, the trial court has concluded that the deceased at the time of his death was healthy person and decided the issue No. 1 in favour of plaintiffs.

Regarding issue No. 2 the trial court considered statements of PW. 1 Ramvati, who stated that on the day of accident her husband went for earning in field and when she reached at the site leg of her husband was stuck on electric wire. When she reached at site there was day light. In her cross she stated that the accident occurred at 5.00 AM. PW. 2 Dr. Suresh Chand stated that on inspection of body he found burn injuries on right hand, chest, left foot. The deceased died due to electric current. He conducted post mortem of deceased vide post mortem report (Ex. 1), according to which there were burn injuries on his right hand, chest and left leg. PW. 3 Ramjilal stated that Mohar Singh was a labourer. On hearing hu