The main legal point established in the judgment is that the electricity company is liable for compensation in case of electrocution from the power line, and the compensation amount should be calculated based on the deceased's occupation and dependents.

Rajesh Bindal, J.

1. Widow and children of deceased Ram Rattan @ Rattan Singh have filed the present petition claiming compensation on account of death of Ram Rattan in electrocution from hanging power cable.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioner No. 1 is widow, petitioner No. 2 is daughter and petitioners No. 3 and 4 are sons of deceased-Ram Rattan. They are petitioners before this court claiming compensation. He had one elder daughter, who was already married. The date of birth of the deceased was 7.4.1956. He was agriculturist by profession owning about 131/2 acres of land. On 26.4.2003, deceased-Ram Rattan had gone on his motor cycle bearing registration No. HR-05-H-3880 towards his fields in village Bastli, but did not return back. The petitioners remained under the impression that as usual, he may have stayed back in the house near the fields. However, on the next morning, they received a message that Ram Rattan was lying dead towards village Brass having been electrocuted by 11,000 KVA line. The matter was reported to the police. Postmortem of deceased-Ram Rattan was conducted. The doctor opined cause of death to be electrocution. DDR was registered on 27.4.2003. As the death of Ram Rattan was caused on account of loose power cables drawn by Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (for short, 'the Nigam'), it was liable to compensate the petitioners. It is further claimed that annual income of the deceased was about Rs. 7,50,000/-, as besides having 131/2 acres of land, he had taken 14 acres of land on lease from Satpal and was running milk dairy with 10 buffaloes. In support of his arguments, reliance was placed upon the judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in M.P. Electricity Board v. Shail Kumar and others, AIR 2002 SC 551; M.S. Grewal and another v. Deep Chand Sood and others, (2001) 8 SCC 151 and this court in CWP No. 4122 of 2006, Pooja Bansal and others v. The State of Haryana and others, decided on 6.2.2014 and CWP No. 12213 of 2003, Ravinder Kaur and others v. Chandigarh Admn and others, decided on 6.2.2014.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents No. 2 to 4 submitted that as the petitioners have already got compensation of Rs. 50,000/- from Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board on 3.10.2003, they are not entitled to any further compensation. They had even given an undertaking not to claim any further compensation. He denied negligence on the part of the Nigam while stating that on account of wind storm, the cable was loose. Such a situation is beyond the control of the Nigam. He further submitted that there is no proof of income of the deceased on record. The land is still with the family from which income is still available. Whatever compensation has been awarded to the petitioners, they are not entitled to any further amount.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book.

5. The fact that Ram Rattan died on account of electrocution from high powered cable drawn by the Nigam is not in dispute. In support of the plea that his date of birth was 7.4.1956, his Matriculation certificate (Annexure P6) has been annexed. The unfortunate incident took place on 26.4.2003, hence, on the date of incident, he was 47 years of age. He had five dependents, namely, his widow, two daughters and two sons. However, the present petition has been filed by the widow, one daughter and two sons, as one daughter is already married.

6. The issue as to whether an electricity company is liable for compensation on account of electrocution from the power line was considered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in M.P. Electricity Board's case (supra) and it was opined as under:

“The responsibility to supply electric energy in the particular locality is statutorily conferred on the Electricity Board. If the energy so transmitted caused injury or death of a human being, who gets unknowingly trapped into it the primary liability to compensate the sufferer is that of the supplie