JUDGMENT :

1. The appellant has challenged the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2017 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Doda (hereinafter to be referred as “the trial court”), whereby the suit of the appellant/plaintiff for recovery of compensation filed against the defendants/respondents has been decreed and an amount of Rs. 2,18,000/- alongwith interest @ 7.5% per annum has been awarded as compensation in his favour. The appellant being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the trial court has sought enhancement of the compensation.

2. It appears that the appellant/plaintiff filed an application under Order 33 of CPC for grant of permission to file a suit as an indigent person for recovery of an amount of Rs. 20.00 lacs as compensation for the disability suffered by him due to electrocution. Vide order dated 22.01.2014, passed by the learned trial court, the appellant/plaintiff was declared as an indigent person and he was permitted to file the suit as such.

3. It was pleaded by the appellant/plaintiff that on 27.05.2012, when he was proceeding from his house towards the house of his brother at village Khanpura Figsoo, Tehsil Thatri, all of a sudden High Tension (HT) electricity line fell down and it touched Low Tension (LT) line, which in turn fell on the service line of his brother’s residence. The service line fell on plaintiff/appellant, as a result of which, he got electrocuted and received grievous injuries. The plaintiff/appellant was taken to hospital, where he underwent treatment. It was pleaded that the plaintiff has not fully recovered and that he has suffered disability. It has also been averred that the plaintiff/appellant is now unable to perform the job of a labourer and agriculturist, which has resulted into loss of his income. It was claimed by the plaintiff that the accident took place due to negligence of the defendants/respondents as they had not taken care to maintain the electricity wires.

4. The defendants/respondents filed the written statement, in which it was contended that there was no negligence on part of the staff of the defendant-department in maintaining the conductors. It was submitted that the accident took place due to sudden bursting of insulator due to which 11KV conductor fell on LT line that was passing nearby, as a result of which the service line broke down. According to the defendants/respondents, there was no question of negligence on the part of the field staff of defendant-department. It was pleaded that the plaintiff received injuries due to his own negligence as he was pulling the service line.

5. Vide order dated 05.08.2014, the learned trial court on the basis of the pleadings of the parties framed the following issues:

“1. Whether on 27.05.2012, the plaintiff suffered serious burn injuries at Khanpur Figsoo leading to his permanent disablement because of the negligence of the defendants in proper maintenance of 11KV HT line which after getting snapped fell on the HT line, which in turn fell on the service line of the plaintiff’s brother’s house, where the plaintiff had gone on the day of occurrence as a result of which one wire fell upon the plaintiff causing electric burn injuries to him? OPP

2. Whether the alleged occurrence took place due to bursting of insulator and snapping of conductors at the place of occurrence which was beyond the control of the defendants? OPD

3. In case issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative, whether the plaintiff is entitled to any compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom? OPP

4. Relief.”

6. In order to prove his case, the plaintiff besides examining himself as witness, also examined PWs Ghulam Rasool, Shameema Begum and Dr. Mohd Rafi as witnesses in support of his case, whereas the defendants examined DW Jalal Din as witness in support of their case.

7. After appreciating the evidence on record, the learned trial court came to the conclusion that the plaintiff had received injuries due to electrocution and the incident