JUDGMENT :

1. By this appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the original defendant and the appellant herein - Madhya Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd. (MGVCL, for short) questioned the legality and propriety of the judgment and decree dated 12.06.2006 passed in Special Civil Suit No.550 of 1998, whereby the plaintiff’s suit was wholly allowed and the appellant herein was directed to pay the compensation of Rs.5,50,000/- to the minor, who suffered a major permanent injury due to electrocution.

2. For brevity, the parties are referred to as per their original status before the learned trial Court.

3. The briefly stated facts born out of the impugned judgment and the record that:-

3.1 The natural guardian of the minor, Rakshaben Chhatrasingh Parmar, filed a Special Civil Suit claiming compensation of amount of Rs.5,50,000/- along with interest on the averment that she is residing in Shreeji Park Society at Karjan with her minor daughter and her husband. The minor daughter was studying in the 9^th standard.

3.2 On 23.06.1997, the minor went along with other friends to play on the terrace of the home. At that time, in the nearby terrace of Vinodbhai Panchal, other children were also playing and at that time, a high-voltage wire hanging just two feet above the height of the home or residence of the minor came in contact with the minor and she was electrocuted and fell unconscious and received severe burn injuries on most of her left leg.

3.3 The minor was immediately shifted to Karjan hospital where it came on record that the burn injuries were very severe in nature and thus, the minor was shifted to S.S.G. Hospital, Vadodara. Yet, the condition of the minor remained serious and she was admitted to a private hospital at Vadodara as an indoor patient and was kept there for treatment for almost 2½ months. Multiple operations took place, and she underwent the knife multiple times. Intensive and prolonged treatment was taken. Ultimately, she lost her left leg below the knee.

3.4 In the aforesaid factual aspect, the plaintiff filed the suit resting the negligency upon the appellant saying that the appellant, who was in the business of selling hazardous goods, is obliged to keep the wires out of the touch, not loose and not hanging. The high-voltage wire, which was expected to be kept at 15 feet, has been rather kept at 2 feet of the height.

3.5 It is claimed that the plaintiff became the victim of the sheer negligence of the appellant. She received multiple injuries and lost her prospects, including the marriage prospects, and incurred a heavy amount of expenses for medicine and medical treatment.

3.6 In the aforesaid averments, the plaintiff claimed compensation of Rs.5,50,000/- as compensation from the appellant towards the expenses, medicines, special diet, transportation, attendant and other future income, etc.

3.7 The process was served to the appellant. Multiple contentions were raised with the specific contention that the high-voltage line was erected and installed much earlier to the construction of the residence, whereupon the minor received the electric shock, illegally and without the permission of the local self-government.

3.8 In view of that, it is claimed that the plaintiff is not entitled to claim any compensation as there is no negligence on the part of the MGVCL – appellant.

3.9 The learned trial Court, after fixing the issues, permitting both the parties to lead the evidence was pleased to grant the decree in favor of the plaintiff in toto, with 9% interest. 3.10 Being aggrieved, the MGVCL is before this Court by way of this appeal.

4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Premal R. Joshi appearing for the appellant – MGVCL. The process was served to the other side, but none remained present.

4.1 The solitary contention raised by learned advocate Mr. Premal R. Joshi that the residence, on which the untoward incident took place, was illegally raised without the permission of the local self-government and it reduced the distance of the