Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
FATHIMA M., FATHISHA M., ANILA R., PRASEETHA. S, SARATH S, SAJITH S – Appellant
Versus
PERMANENT LOK ADALATH FOR PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICES – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accident details and petitioners' background. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. contentions regarding negligence and strict liability. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. respondents' defense and liability discussions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 4. court's analysis of pla's decision and negligence. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 5. supreme court principles on strict liability. (Para 29 , 30) |
| 6. order to remand for fresh consideration. (Para 31) |
JUDGMENT
2. On 14.06.2021 at about 9.00 p.m., the father of the 1st petitioner heard his wife screaming. When he rushed to the spot, he saw his wife lying on the ground. Without knowing the gravity of the accident, he attempted to rescue her and suffered an electric shock. Thereafter, the neighbour, who is the husband of the 4th petitioner herein, rushed to the spot on hearing the scream and, while attempting to rescue them, also suffered an electric shock and lost his life.
4. Ext. P1 FIR was registered. On the very next day, officials from the 2nd and 3rd respondents visited the accident site, conducted an enquiry and prepared Ext.P3 site mahazar without examining any family members of the victims or eye-witne
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
