Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
PRAKASH GUPTA
R S E B – Appellant
Versus
LACCHI DEVI – Respondent
CFA/215/2000
Electricity boards have a duty to maintain their lines and wires in a safe condition and are liable for any negligence that results in injury or death.
Headnote:
NEGLIGENCE - FATAL ACCIDENTS ACT, 1855 - COMPENSATION - ELECTRICITY LINE - FALLING OF ELECTRIC WIRE - DEATH DUE TO ELECTROCUTION - LIABILITY OF ELECTRICITY BOARD
Fact of the Case:
Debu Ram died due to electrocution when he came in contact with an electric wire that had fallen down due to a natural calamity. The plaintiffs, his family members, filed a suit under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, claiming compensation from the electricity board.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the electricity board was liable for the death of Debu Ram as it failed to take necessary precautions to prevent the falling of the electric wire, despite having knowledge of the danger.
Issues: Whether the electricity board was negligent in maintaining the electric line and wires?
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the evidence that a blue cow and a dog had already died due to the fallen electric wire, and that a complaint had been made to the electricity board but no action was taken.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal filed by the electricity board and upheld the trial court's judgment awarding compensation to the plaintiffs.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 215/2000
1 Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Jaipur through its
Managing Director
2. The Chief Engineer, Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited,
Jaipur
3. The Superintending Engineer, Ajmer Vidhyut Vitram Nigam
Limited, Sikar
4. The Executive Engineer, Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited,
A
.
. f * E
Sikar
--
+
ss
.
*y.i $$ ,/$ ,P .-
h
5. The ~ s s i s ~ a n t ' ~ ~ n ' ~ ? n e e r ,
Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited,
"
Piprali, Sikar '
Versus
I.
Smt. Lachhi Devi w/o Late6f;lr.i-Debu Ram
2k.b
2. Hemi Chand S/o ~ a t e - % h s q ~ d b u
Ram
.A,
3. Ram Chandra ~ / o * ~ a t b ' s h r + i \ . ~ e b d
Rams
4. Manju D/o Late Shrf Debu Ram
5. Suman D/o Late Shri; ~ e b u :
Ram
6. Subash S/o Late shri:.~,eb;u:,~am
z%
3
.!w.
"Pi$"i4.-:.*
Jn
=
7
h ;
6
Y
For Appellant(s)
.
j l ~ ' r .
Alok Garg, Advocate
For Respondent(s)
/ +
8'
, '"
;$?~<
" 3.
1 >\
#&: ? j -. ', - --'. i
- + . %
. i
r a',
'$3
5 - 2 g _<h@&_,>i.*
giq
J$i.k
- 9 \'
%' "..
H ON'B LE ~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ ; U S ~ ~ . C E
P RAKAS n G u PTA
This Civil Regular First Appeal has been filed by the
appellants-defendants' (for short, 'the defendants') under Section
96 CPC against the impugned judgment and decree dated
11.05.20.00 passed by the learned District Judge, Sikar (for short
'the trial Court') in Civil Suit No. 8/1996 : Lachhi Devi & Ors. Vs.
Chaiman, RSEB and Ors., whereby the civil suit filed by the
respondents-plaintiffs (for short 'the plaintiffs') has been partly
allowed and a sum of Rs. 1,25,000/- along with interest @ 12%
from the date of
filing the suit has been
awarded as
compensation.
Facts of the case are that the plaintiffs filed a suit
against the defendants before the trial court under the Fatal
Accidents Act, 1855 claiming compensation on account of death of
Debu Ram, who died
~
r
-
;dz6,e$ $lectl'ocution on 20.10.1995 at about
p $& :;b ".
z%.m&$;%
'""
4:00 AM when h,,$ was returning back to his Dhani and came in
contact with-an electric wire in which electric current was flowing
and the %same was falling down the electricity pole situated at
Kulhariyon Ki Dhani, PanchaygtSam.iti Piprali Village Gungara.
The defendants filea, their reply, wherein it was averred
that due to natural calaaity,,in the midnight of 19.10.1995 and
20.10.1995, tha insulatoJ,b.roke
a &?fl,r 'j,
and electric wire fell down.
a &% {"$. I"
g$$;,$ fk% *
Necessary issues qere 'framed.
*"
L*J
Evidence was IkdF'!an'd "after hearing both the parties,
the trial court vide its jud$gme,nt
.'A
. 11.05.2000 partly allowed the suit
gl '% ,
...
and held the plaintitfs+tenti'tled to 'get a sum of Rs.1,25,000/-
$ ,
"
I
W&$,
+,.$
*p'
=
alongwith interest @ 12~%$ p<.a, from the date of filing of the suit,
as conipensation.
Learned counsel for the defendants submits that
deceased Debu Ram himself was negligent. Electricity line and
wires were rightly stretched and there was no fault of the
defendants. D u e TO natural calamity, the insulator broke and* wire
fell down, for which no complaint was submitted to the
defendants. The learned trial court has passed the judgment
without due appreciation of the evidence available on record and
t h u s committed material illegality.
Heard. Considered.
The sole question which arises for determination in this
appeal is:
'Whether the judgment and decree passed
by the trial Court is based on proper
appreciation of evidence or not?'
From the material on record, it is evident that due to
"
b
4
falling of the e~ect&ic:~livir.ej,
~ b e f o ~ e
Deburam's death, a bluecow
'q&$
$.- .ha-
i s A
3
% *YZ>.
(Nilgai) and a. dog? had already died. From the plaintiffsf evidence
it is also e.vident that a complaint in that regard had already been
made, d&'bite that no action was taken.
The trial court deal@fiith. each and every aspect of the
i *
