Advocates:
['DIPAK R DAVE', 'NIRAV C SANGHAVI', 'UNSERVED EXPIRED R', 'RULE SERVED']

C/SA/146/2013 JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 146 of 2013

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

Sd/-

==========================================================

1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to

see the judgment ?

No

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

No

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the

judgment ?

No

4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law

as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any

order made thereunder ?

No

==========================================================

GUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD NOW CONVERTED AS

Versus

RABARI MESUR KARSHAN

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2

MR VIREN G. DAVE for MR NIRAV C SANGHAVI(5950) for the

RESPONDENT(s) No. 1,4,5,6

RULE SERVED(64) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 7

UNSERVED EXPIRED (R)(69) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2,3

==========================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

Date : 24/01/2019

ORAL JUDGMENT

This Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of

Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short “the Code”) has been filed by

the Gujarat Electricity Board (for short “the Board”) being

aggrieved by concurrent findings in Special Civil Suit No.43 of

1993 and its judgment and decree dated 21.08.2004 passed by

the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Porbandar. The respondents-

Page 1 of 12

C/SA/146/2013 JUDGMENT

plaintiffs succeeded inasmuch as the appellants were directed

to pay compensation of Rs.2,75,120/- alongwith interest at

the rate of 15% p.a. The Board preferred an appeal against the

said judgment and decree, initially before this Court, being

First Appeal No. 6721 of 1990. By an order dated 22.03.2007,

in view of the amendment of the Gujarat Civil Court Act, 2005,

the appeal was remanded to the District Court. The appellate

Court by its judgment and order dated 01.10.2010 passed in

Regular Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2007 confirmed the judgment

and decree passed by the trial Court against the Board. Hence,

this Second Appeal.

By an order dated 24.07.2013, the appeal was admitted

on the following substantial questions of law”-

“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the

case, the courts below had justified in attributing total

negligence on the part of the appellants in respect of

accident occurred, more particularly, when the deceased

was driving a tractor at night and had a ladder on top of

the tractor with height of 23 feet?

(ii)

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of

the case, the courts below ere justified in awarding the

interest at flat rate of 15% as ordered?

(iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of

Page 2 of 12

C/SA/146/2013 JUDGMENT

the case and having regard to the evidence on record, the

amount of compensation awarded by the Courts below

could not be said to be justified and proper?

The facts in brief giving rise to this appeal are that the

deceased Lakhman Meraman was driving his tractor-trailor

accompanying with one Bhikhu Jesa on 06.03.1992 towards

the Rana Bordi in the filed of Raja Meraman, where the electric

line of the defendants was lying without having the guard wire

and accidentally a live electric wire suddenly fall on the

tractor-trailer and suddenly both of them were died on the

spot. Thus, the heirs of the deceased filed suit before the trial

court and after hearing both the parties, the learned trial Judge

has partly allowed the claim of the respondent to the extent of

Rs. 2,75,120/- together with