IN THE HIGH COAURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

R.S.A.No.1947 of 2002

Date of Decision : 04.03.2008.

1. State of Haryana through Secretary Deptment of Forest of

Wild Life, Chandigarh.

2. Collector, Panchkula.

....Appellants.

Versus

Parmanand son of Shri Uday Ram, resident of village Chaila,

Tehsil Kalka, District Panchkula.

....Respondent

****

Present: Mr.L.aR.Nanda, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana,

for the appellants.

Sh.Bhag Singh, Advocate, for respondent.

Rakesh Kumar Jain (J)

This appeal has been brought by the defendants

against the judgment decree of Lower Appellate Court dated

31.01.2002, who had modified the decree of Trial Court and

awarded Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for the death of Mohan

Lal, alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of decree

R.S.A.No.1947 of 2002

-2-

of the Trial Court till the date of realization.

Shorn of unnecessary details, the brief facts of the

case are that Mohan Lal, son of the plaintiff, was a student of 7^th

class and was studying in a school at Morni. On 10.08.1989,

while he was going to his school alongwith his cousin Yad Ram

on a public passage, they were attacked by a leopard who

carried away both Mohan Lal and Yad Ram. Mutilated body of

Mohan Lal was lateron recovered from the forest, though Yad

Ram could not be traced. The plaintiff filed suit for mandatory

injunction seeking direction to the defendants to provide

employment to the son of plaintiffs and to pay adequate

compensation, in lieu of death of their son Mohan Lal. The

plaintiffs alleged that leopard was a man-eater. Various

complaints were made to the concerned officials but no action

was taken which resulted into the loss of valuable human life of

Mohan Lal. The incident of the death of Mohan Lal by leopard

was also published in newspapers. The defendants had

assured the plaintiffs with financial help and to provide job but

failed on their promise. Therefore, the plaintiffs had to file the

suit seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/-.

In the written statement, the defendant admitted that

the dead body of Mohan Lal was found in the forest near village

Chaila but asserted that the cause of death could not be

ascertained. It was disputed that Mohal Lal died on account of

R.S.A.No.1947 of 2002

-3-

any attack by a panther. It was also denied that the defendants

had not taken any action on the complaints. Rather it was

asserted that a sum of Rs.15,000/- has been paid by the Deputy

Commissioner, Ambala to the plaintiff Parmanand as

compensation on humanitarian grounds. The plaintiff filed

replication to the w*ritten statement and following issues were

framed by the Trial Court:-

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to relief of

mandatory injunction as claimed ? OPP

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any

compensation ? OPP

3. Whether the suit is barred by limitation ? OPD

4. Whether the suit is not maintainable ? OPD

5. Whether the plaintiff has got no locus standi to file

the suit ? OPD

6. Relief.

The trial Court decreed the suit concluding that the

plaintiffs were entitled to compensation in accordance with the

compensation rates as mentioned in the list Mark-1(A).

The defendants did not challenge the finding of the

Trial Court by way of cross-objection or cross-appeal. Thus the

findings of the Trial Court to the effect that Mohan Lal had died

on account of attack by leopard and the State was negligent,

was upheld.

The plaintiff came in appeal before the First

R.S.A.No.1947 of 2002

-4-

Appellate Courtagainst the inadequacy of the compensation.

The first Appellate Court after taking into consideration decision

rendered by this Court in 1999 (1) ACC 636 (D.B.) titled as

Punjab Civil and Consumer Welfare Front (Regd.), Banur and

another versus Union Territory of Chandigarh and others and

another decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case reported as

1999 (II) ACC 1 titled as Mun