IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
M.M. Das, J.
KHETRAMANI JENA AND OTHERS - APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS - RESPONDENT
Decided On : 10-12-2009
Electrocution - Negligence - Compensation - Electricity Act, 2003 - Sections 135, 161 - The court discussed the negligence on the part of the electricity supply authorities and the compensation to be awarded for the death of the deceased persons by electrocution. The court referred to the cases of Parvati Devi v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi, 2000 (3) SCC 754 and H.S.E.B. and Ors. v. Ram Nath and Ors. : 2004)5 SCC 793 to establish the negligence of the electricity supply authorities and the principles of compensation.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought compensation for the death of their husbands due to electrocution caused by alleged negligence on the part of the electricity supply authorities.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the negligence on the part of the electricity supply authorities was established, and awarded compensation to the petitioners for the death of the deceased persons by electrocution.
Issues: The main issue was the negligence of the electricity supply authorities leading to the death of the deceased persons by electrocution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles established in the cases of Parvati Devi v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi, 2000 (3) SCC 754 and H.S.E.B. and Ors. v. Ram Nath and Ors. : 2004)5 SCC 793 to establish the negligence of the electricity supply authorities and the principles of compensation.
Final Decision: The court directed the electricity supply authorities to pay Rs. 2,00,000 to the petitioners in each of the writ petitions as compensation for the death of the deceased persons by electrocution.
JUDGMENT :
M.M. Das, J. - The Petitioners in the aforesaid Writ Petitions have prayed for issuance of a direction in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the Opp. Parties to pay a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 to the Petitioners in each-of the cases as compensation for the lose of the life of the only bread-winner of the respective families of the Petitioners, who died due to electrocution on account of alleged negligence on the part of the Opp Parties. Statements as made in both the Writ Petitions show that almost at the same time on 21.9.2004, the husbands of the Petitioner No. 1 in each of the Writ Petitions were electrocuted by a live wire while they were proceeding to attend the funeral ceremony of one of their relations, namely, Sankarsan Jena. It has been stated in the Writ Petitions that on the fateful day, while both the deceased persons were proceeding to attend the funeral ceremony found a small branch of a tree had fallen on the telephone were to an extent that the same was touching the ground on the road. They, while attempting to remove the said telephone wire from the road, got electrocuted as the said wire was charged with electricity. It was found that the nearby electric pole has been uprooted resulting in live wire coming in contact with the telephone wire & due to the breaking of the branch of a tree, the said telephone wire snapped & was falling on the ground with which the deceased persons came in contact. Even the persons who attempted to rescue the deceased persons sustained injury due to electrocution. An U.D. Case was registered by the police & autopsy was conducted on the dead bodies of the said deceased persons. It is further alleged by the Petitioners that death of the said deceased persons was caused solely due to the negligence & carelessness on the part of the electricity supply authorities.
2. Counter affidavits have been filed by the Gpp. Parties 2, 3 and 4 in each of the Writ Petitions.
In W.P. (C) No. 980 of 2005, counter affidavit has been filed by the said Opp. Parties 2, 3 and 4, inter alia, stating that the case involves disputed questions of fact, which cannot be gone into in an application Under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India. It has been further stated in the counter affidavit that the facts alleged in the Writ Petition are denied. No where in the counter affidavit, it has been refuted that both the deceased persons died due to electrocution as described in the Writ Petitions except stating that the same are not admitted. The Opp. Parties have further stated in the counter affidavits that neither the Petitioner No. 1 in both the Writ Petitions nor the villagers have ever made any representation before the NESCO authorities with regard.to the alleged negligence. It was only after receipt of the notice of this Writ Petition, the Opp. Parties 2, 3 and 4 came to know about this incident & thereafter, the concerned Junior Engineer (Electrical) & the Sub-Divisional Officer (Electrical) went to the spot & came, to know from the villagers that the deceased persons had been to a Neem tree beside the road & cut the branches of the said tree for collection of the wood for funeral ceremony. One of the branches of the Neem tree fell on the telephone line as a result, one telephone wire snapped &sprang up, as a result of which, it came in contact with the L.T. line. The deceased Bhagaban Sial tried to remove the green branches from the telephone wire & got electrocuted. The villagers thereafter removed the telephone wire from the L.T. line by the help of the telephone department.
In the counter affidavit filed in W.P. (C) No. 978 of 2005, the Opp. Parties 2, 3 and 4 have stated that two wire L.T. line runs on the western side of the road to Sial Sahi, whereas the telephone line was/is on the eastern side of the said road. Due to some reason, best known to the Telephone Department, one of the telephone wires/conductors snapped at the Sial Sahi Chhak and sprang up & came in contact with the existing
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.