Order On Board

11/07/2023 This appeal under Section 96 of CPC, 1908 has been filed by the appellants aggrieved by judgment and decree dated 23/09/2010 passed in Civil Suit No.6-B/2010 by the 3rd Additional District Judge (FTC), Manendragarh, District – Korea, CG.

2. Facts of the case in nutshell is that the plaintiff / respondent No.1 filed a suit for recovery to the tune of Rs.55,000/- on account of death of two of his buffaloes who died because of electroculation. The suit of the plaintiff in short is that he resides in village – Mohardaha Dafai Lendri, south Jhagrakhand, Tahsil – Manendragarh, District – Koriya and engaged in the business of running a Hotel. On 05/04/2006, he purchased two buffaloes from one Mayaram S/o Balcharan for Rs.33,000/- and Rs.15,000/- respectively. The buffaloes used to give 15 litres of milk per day. He used to give cattle feed of Rs.100/-. On 17/09/2008 at about 4 PM, when both the buffaloes were grazing near Eita dafai, electric wire of 440 volt fell down from a pole and both the buffaloes came in contact and because of the high voltage current, both the buffaloes died. The report was lodged in the police station of Jhagrakhand and post mortem of both the cattles were conducted. Notice was issued to the respondents herein on 13/01/09 enclosing FIR, Rojnaamcha Sanha and post mortem report and claimed compensation of Rs.55,000/-. In reply to the notice, respondent No.2/defendant No.3 stated that maintenance of electric line is with the SECL management. Therefore, on the above basis, the plaintiff / respondent No.1 filed the suit for recovery. Summons of the suit were issued to the defendants 1 and 2 / appellants herein and then filed their written statement and denied the averments of the plaint. They have stated that they were not aware that the plaintiff/ respondent No.1 has purchased any buffalo from Mayaram and also denied that on 17/09/2008, any electric wire fell down from the electric pole of the colliery. It was further pleaded in the written statement that the police has not intimated with regard to the incident dated 17/09/2008. Neither plaintiff / respondent No.1 has informed the same. The poles which are installed for electric line are being maintained by expert employees of the appellant / defendants No.1 and 2 and there is no negligence on their part. Neither any electric wire fell down nor the buffaloes had died. Respondent No.2/ defendant No.3 also filed its written statement and stated that they are not aware of the business of plaintiff / respondent No.1, exaggerated amount of suit is filed. Infact the buffaloes were neither electroculated by the electric wires of defendant No.3 / respondent No.2 nor they died of electroculation. The police has not intimated with regard to the incident dated 17/09/2008 of falling of electric wire or electroculation of buffaloes. Neither the plaintiff has intimated the same. Hasdeo area of SECL has been divided in two points, one for the technical purposes and other for general purposes, maintenance of which is done by the appellant / defendants 1 and 2. There is no responsibility of defendant No.3 / respondent No.2 for the maintenance. On the basis of above broad pleadings, learned trial Court framed following issues -

a) whether two buffaloes owned by the plaintiff / respondent No.1 died of electroculation at 4 PM on

17/09/2008?

b) Whether because of the negligence of defendents, electric wire fell down?

c) Whether 2 buffaloes died as they came in contact with the fallen electric wire?

d) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to Rs.55,000/- of compensation from the appellants and respondent No.2 herein.

f) Relief and cost.

3. In order to prove pleadings, the plaintiff / respondent No.1 examined 5 witnesses and the appellants / defendants 1 and 2 examined 2 witnesses.

4. Learned trial Court after appreciation of evidence, material and evidence brought on record decided the issues in favour of the plaintiff/ respondent no.1 and as against the appellant / defe