SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Mad) 615

K.SAMPATH, S.R.SINGHARAVELU
Chairman – Appellant
Versus
Parvathi Ammal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. S. Rajeswaran, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. R. Muralidharan, Advocate for Respondents.

Judgment :

K. Sampath, J .

1. The defendants in O.S.No. 150 of 1988 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore are the appellants in this appeal. The respondents herein filed the suit as indigent persons for recovery of Rs.1,00,000 as compensation for the loss caused to them on account of the death of one Kuppuswamy-husband of the first respondent and father of the other respondents.

2. Their case was as follows: Kuppuswamy was engaged in the manufacture of pots and selling the same. He used to earn Rs.250 to Rs.300 per week. On 13.12.1986, at about 4.30 a.m., Kuppuswamy got electrocuted in front of his house at Manaveli on Vandipalayam road. The electrocution was because of the sagging of the high tension electric wire in front of his house. When he came out of the house, he came into contact with the high tension wire which caused his instantaneous death. The sagging of the wire was purely due to the negligence of the Electricity Department. The Department had not taken necessary precaution to prevent the dangers of line wires getting sagged or snapped resulting in serious accidents. They should have made provision of automatic disconnection of supply of energy or







































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top