Back
ARINDAM LODH
Senior Manager, Kailasahar Electrical Sub-division No. 1, Tsecl – Appellant
Versus
Hanif Ali – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. fatal accident details and claims against tsecl. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. discussion on the applicability of limitation period. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. consideration of trial court's oversight on limitation. (Para 7) |
| 4. determining limitation as a substantial question of law. (Para 8) |
| 5. remittance for trial court's fresh consideration on limitation. (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Arindam Lodh, J. - Heard Mr. N. Majumder, learned counsel for the appellant- Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited (for short, TSECL). None appears for the respondents.
2. This is an appeal filed under Section 96 of the CPC against the judgment dated 01.10.2019 and decree dated 30.10.2019 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kailasahar, Unakoti, Tripura, in connection with case no. Money Suit 04 of 2018.
3. The facts of the case, as elicited, are reproduced here-in-below:
(a) On 03.06.2016 while son of the plaintiff, namely, Jahir Ali, aged about 20 years, mason by profession and earning Rs. 400/- per day, at about 12.00 noon went to the pond of the plaintiff for taking bath, and when reached near the side of pond unfortunately fell down on earth due to electric shock and died on the spot. The
The suit for compensation under the Fatal Accident Act must be filed within two years from the date of death, as per Article 82 of the Limitation Act.
The court held that claims for death due to wrongful acts are governed by the Fatal Accidents Act's limitation period, specifically Article 82 of the Limitation Act.
Negligence involves failure to exercise due care, which includes foreseeability of harm, and leads to liability when conduct results in damage.
Electricity providers are strictly liable for accidents caused by negligence in maintaining infrastructure, with compensation calculated based on the deceased's earnings and family dependency.
The court upheld the trial court's decision, ruling that the defendants could not raise a limitation defense not presented at trial, and that plaintiffs proved negligence in the electrocution case.
The primary liability for compensation in cases of electrocution lies with the electricity supplier when negligence in maintaining safe electrical infrastructure is established, regardless of the vic....
The court upheld that minors have protections under S.6 of the Limitation Act, enabling them to file claims despite filing deadlines, particularly when negligence is established.
Electricity suppliers are strictly liable for injuries caused by their infrastructure, regardless of negligence, and must compensate victims for losses incurred.
Suppliers of electricity are strictly liable for harm caused by their operations, regardless of negligence, and notional income can be reasonably assessed for compensation.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
