The main legal point established is the liability for damages under the Fatal accidents act, 1855, in cases of negligence leading to fatal accidents.

JUDGMENT

Sudesh Bansal, J. - This first appeal under Section 96 CPC has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 6-3-2003 passed by the additional District Judge No.2, Sikar, Camp Srimadhopur, in Suit No.9/2002, whereby and whereunder decreeing the suit allowed damages to plaintiffs under Section 1(a) of the Fatal accidents act, 1855.

2. The facts of the case are that respondent plaintiffs (hereafter `the plaintiffs') filed a civil suit claiming damages for electrocution with Smt.Santosh Devi wife of plaintiff Gyarsi Lal and mother of other plaintiffs, who died at the spot on 14-3-2000 at 4.00 PM because of electrocution, while she was working in her agricultural field. It was averred that 11000 KV line was going over their agricultural land and lines were not properly insulated due to which the deceased Santosh Devi while irrigating crops sustained electric current and died on spot. alleging negligence on the part of defendant company suit was filed claiming damages to the tune of Rs.48,25,000/-.

3. On issuing notices appellants-defendants (hereafter `the defendants') filed written statement and denied the allegation of negligence and stated that because of bad weather some wires touched the ground on account of which the accident occurred and the deceased died. The defendants did not receive any complaint regarding faulty electric lines and it was the duty of plaintiffs to take proper precaution while working nearby electric lines and no liability could be shifted upon defendants

4. On the basis of pleadings of parties the trial court framed two issues. Plaintiffs examined four witnesses and exhibited 20 documents. Defendants examined four witnesses. The trial court considering oral and documentary evidence led by both parties came to the conclusion that from the evidence of witnesses of defendants themselves negligence on the part of defendant was proved and assessing the income of deceased to be Rs.30,000/- per year, and that since she was 30 years of age at the time of fatal accident she would have earned further 15 years, and in such manner damages has been awarded to plaintiffs Rs.4,50,000/- and the issue No.1 was decided in favour of plaintiffs. accordingly issue No.2 was also decided against defendants and in favour of plaintiffs vide judgment and decree dated 6-3-2003. Of the amount of award Rs.50,000/- in the name of each children was directed to keep in fixed deposit in bank till the date of their achieving maturity. Rest amount of award was to be paid to plaintiff Gyarsi Lal husband of deceased. Being aggrieved of the judgment and decree dated 6-3-2003 present first appeal has been filed.

5. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the impugned judgment and decree as also other material available on record.

6. Learned counsel for defendants has submitted that the impugned judgment and decree is liable to be set aside as the trial court has wrongly applied multiplier in awarding compensation while the suit in issue was filed for damages. It has been further submitted that trial court has relied only on oral evidence to conclude for negligence of defendants. There was no complaint regarding broken wires. Therefore findings of the trial court are perverse and the impugned judgment and decree are liable to be quashed and set aside.

7. Per contra, counsel for plaintiffs has submitted that the trial court has not committed any illegality in awarding damages to plaintiffs for death of not only an earning member of the family but she was an important member of the family. Due to her death minor children were deprived of love and affection of mother and the husband lost his life partner. The trial court has relied not only on oral and documentary evidence produced by plaintiffs but also on evidence of defendants to conclude for negligence of defendants, as defendants' witness Dw.3 Badri had admitted for broken wires prior to fatal accident of death of deceased and that insulator was not fixed on wires. This fact was