ORDER :

1. The present appeal has been preferred by Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. against the judgment and decree dated 24.08.2022 passed by the Additional District Judge, Kuchaman City (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Fatal Accident (CIVIL) Case No. 133/2021 whereby suit of the claimants-respondents for compensation under the Indian Fatal Accident Act, 1855 (for short 'the Act') has been partly decreed and an amount of Rs.4,70,000/- along with interest @ 5.50% per annum has been awarded as compensation.

2. A suit was preferred by the claimants-respondents with the following submissions:

(i) On 11.08.2013, when their son Rahul was returning back to home, he came in contact with the stay wires of DP through which current was passing and got electrocuted and ultimately, succumbed to the injuries.

(ii) The information of the incident was given to the defendant department on the same day but no inquiry qua the said incident was undertaken by the department. FIR qua the said incident was also got registered and after investigation, it was concluded that Rahul died due to electrocution. The Post Mortem Report also suggested death of the deceased because of shock by electrocution.

(iii) The stay wire was not having insulator upon it and was causing high voltage electricity current. Because of the negligence of the department in maintaining the electric appliances/instruments, the son of the claimants got electrocuted and as a result expired. Therefore, the defendant department is liable to compensate the claimants.

3. The case of the appellants-defendants was as under:

(i) There was no negligence on part of the defendants and the death did not occur due to any such alleged negligence.

(ii) The appellant department did not receive any information of the said incident through the claimants or their family members. In fact the appellants got to know about the incident on 12.08.2013 through the newspaper and soon after the same, a Junior Engineer was deputed to investigate the matter who submitted his report on 23.08.2013 concluding that there was no negligence on part of the department. Police officials also did not investigate anything from the officers of the department.

(iii) The fact is that the deceased was cutting tree near 11000 KV line and having contacted the electric current passing through the said 11000 KV Line, got electrocuted. There is no possibility of current passing through stay wire connected with the 11000 KV line, as if such thing had happened, there would have been an earth fault in the line and the fuse located at the transformer would have burnt thereby stopping the flow of electricity. Further, the stay wire was installed about 4 feet below the electricity line and therefore, the averment of current passing through stay wire is on the face of it, incorrect.

4. Learned trial Court, on the basis of the pleadings, framed five issues as under:

^^¼1½ vk;k jkgqy fnukad 11-08-2013 dks lkj.kksa dh ck.kh esa cdfj;ka pjkdj ?kj vk jgk Fkk rks jkLrs esa fctyh ds iksy esa rk.k esa djUV vkus ls jkgqy dh e`R;q gks xÃ\ && ckFkÊx.k

¼2½ vk;k jkgqy dh e`R;q bl ;kfpdk ds pj.k Øekad 3] 4] 5 esa vfHkdfFkr fd;s x;s rF;ksa ds vkèkkj ij cfroknhx.k dh ykijokgh ls gqà gS\ && ckFkÊx.k

¼3½ vk;k ckFkÊx.k bl ;kfpdk esa vfHkdfFkr dh xà dqy jkf'k 28]75]000@& v{kjs NCchl yk[k fipsÙkj gtkj :i;s foi{khx.k ls {kfriwÆr ds :i esa ckIr djus ds vfèkdkjh gS\ && ckFkÊx.k

¼4½ vk;k ckFkÊx.k e`rd jkgqy ij vkfJr ugÈ Fks] bl dkj.k ls ckFkÊx.k ds }kjk cLrqr dh xà ;g ;kfpdk pyus ;ksX; ugÈ gSA &&foi{khx.k

¼5½ vuqrks"k\**

5. Claimants examined Sohani Devi (PW-1), Kesharam (PW-2) and got exhibited eight documents whereas the appellants defendants examined Ramakant Sharma (DW-1), Mahendra Singh (DW-2), Ramcha