The main legal point established in the judgment is the duty of authorities to prevent mishaps related to electricity transmission lines, and the liability of the supplier of electric energy in cases of injury or death caused by electrocution.

JUDGMENT :

1. The appellants have challenged the judgment and decree dated 13.03.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge, Kathua (hereinafter to be referred as the trial court), whereby the suit of the respondents for recovery of compensation has been decreed.

2. It appears that the respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit against the appellants/defendants seeking recovery of a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (five lacs) as compensation on account of death of Mohinder Singh, who happened to be the husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondent Nos. 2 to 5. It was pleaded by the plaintiffs that on 04.01.2007 at about 11 am, while deceased Mohinder Singh was grazing his cattle at Mehtabpur Khad, he came in contact with a live 11 KV electric wire that was installed for the purpose of transmission of electricity by the defendant-department. According to the plaintiffs, the electric wire was installed in a careless and negligent manner and the same was not properly maintained, as a result of which, it fell down on the ground and deceased Mohinder Singh came in contact with it. This resulted in electrocution and consequent death of the deceased on spot. It was pleaded that it is the duty of the defendant-department and its employees to maintain the electric lines and wires and that they have failed to discharge their duties in this regard, which has become the cause of death of the deceased.

3. It was averred in the plaint that the deceased was aged 43 years of age at the time of his death. He was working as an agriculturist and was also running a dairy unit. The monthly income of the deceased was pleaded as Rs. 8000/-. In all, compensation in the amount of Rs. 5.00 lacs was claimed by the plaintiffs from the defendants.

4. The appellants/defendants contested the suit by filing their written statement. In their written statement, the defendants expressed their ignorance about the accident and consequent death of the deceased. However, they admitted that on 04.01.2007, one HT pole of 11 KV line got broken from the top about three feet below and tilted on one side. It was also pleaded that the conductor of the pole came in contact with the guard netting but the conductor was never snapped. It was contended that the guard netting was at sufficient height from the ground and could not come in contact with any object or human life. Thus, according to the defendants, the deceased could not have died by coming into contact with falling wire. The defendants denied their negligence but admitted that the electricity was restored at about 5.30 p.m after undertaking necessary repairs. The defendants have also submitted that an FIR came to be registered about the incident, which is subject matter of the suit. It is also pleaded that the deceased may have got electrocuted due to his own misadventure and it is impossible that he would have come in contact with live 11 KV wire.

5. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues came to be framed:

“1. Whether Mohinder Singh deceased while grazing cattle come in grip of electric wire due to careless and negligent manner due to installation of wire by defendants? OPP

2. Whether defendants were duty bound to maintain-check the electric wires of all lines? OPP

3. Whether Mohinder Singh deceased being agriculturist used to earn Rs. 8000/- per month and plaintiffs are his legal heirs/OPP

4. Whether defendants are liable to pay compensation to the plaintiffs amount to Rs. 5.00/- ? OPP

5. Whether defendants were not negligent in installation of wires of electricity? OPD

6. Relief.”

6. In order to prove their case, the plaintiffs examined plaintiff No. 1, Nirmala Devi, and PWs Prem Singh, Shadi Lal, Shiv Dev Singh and Dr. Mukul Ubot as witnesses in support of their case. As against this, the defendants examined DWs Jagjeet Singh, Rajinder Kumar and Yash Paul as witnesses in support of their case.

7. After appreciating the evidence on record, the learned trial court came to the conclusion that deceased Mohinder Singh