Defendants 1 to 3 were not liable for the death caused by electrocution due to insufficient evidence; responsibility lay with defendants 4 and 5 for their negligence in maintaining electrical infrastructure.

JUDGMENT :

(K. SUJANA, J.)

Both these appeals are filed by the defendants aggrieved by the decree and judgment dated 09.08.1995 in O.S.No.40 of 1987 on the file of Subordinate Judge at Asifabad. A.S.No.2250 of 2000 is filed by the appellants who are defendant Nos.1 to 3 in O.S.No.40 of 1987 and A.S.No.1643 of 2001 is filed by the appellants who are defendant Nos.4 and 5 in the said suit.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter referred to as arrayed in O.S.No.40 of 1987.

3. O.S.No.40 of 1987 was filed by the plaintiffs claiming damages of Rs.2,30,400/- from the defendants for the death of one P.Bapu who died on 06.10.1984 at 3.30 hours due to rash and negligent act of defendants 1 to 3 and defendant Nos.4 and 5 are vicariously liable for the negligent act of defendants 1 to 3. The plaintiffs 2 to 5 and 7 are the sons of 1^st plaintiff and plaintiff No.6 is the daughter of the deceased Bapu. On the night of 03.10.1984, the 1^st defendant celebrated Ursu at Jamedhar-ki-darga at Asifabad. The Darga was electrified by defendant No.3 at the instance of defendant No.1 and power connection was taken from the house of defendant No.2. In the Ursu defendant No.1 has arranged kavali programme at the Darga on 03.10.1984 and since that date illumination of electrification was arranged for the purpose of Ursu which was continued till 06.10.1984. Defendant Nos.1 to 3 have not removed electric wires across the way of Darga even after celebration of Ursu which were erected with the help of Bamboo Sticks without taking necessary precautions. The power connection was taken from the main wire from the house of defendant No.2 was supported by G.I.wire which contains many joints, was not properly covered by defendant No.3. On the night of 05.10.1984, the deceased and some others were celebrating Moharram festival at Quadim Masjid at Asifabad, at about 3.30 hours, the deceased along with others had taken procession of “Alams” and while proceeding towards Jamedar- ki-darga, Alam came into contact with electric wire erected by defendant Nos.1 to 3. One Podupuganti Pullaiah, Narayana, the deceased Bapu and some others tried to remove electric wires unaware of power supply through the said wire. All the above persons received electric shock, but escaped unhurt, except the deceased Bapu who received severe shock and while taking to hospital, on the way he died. As such, legal heirs of the deceased claimed compensation from defendant No.1 who organized Ursu, defendant No.2 who supplied electricity and defendant No.3 who electrified Darga in a rash and negligent manner and defendant Nos.4 and 5 who have not taken proper care and caution.

4. According to the plaintiffs, the deceased is the only earning member of the family; that the deceased was aged about 51 years and he was a Washer man earning Rs.800/- per month. As such claimed compensation of Rs.3,30,400/- towards damages.

5. The defendant Nos.1 to 3 filed written statement denying that the deceased died due to their rash and negligent act and defendant Nos.4 and 5 denied that they are vicariously liable for the negligent act of defendant Nos.1 to 3. Defendant Nos.1 to 3 denied electrification of Darga and also denied that electricity connection was taken from the house of defendant No.2. When they have not arranged any electrical wire, the question of removing the wire from Darga does not arise. They further submitted that the plaintiffs have already initiated criminal proceedings against defendants 1 to 3 under Section 304-A of INDIAN PENAL CODE and the said case ended in acquittal. Therefore, they are no way liable for the said accident. Defe