Gill J:

This is an action for damages arising out of the death of five buffaloes and a dog belonging to the plaintiff as a result of their being electrocuted by coming in contact with a telephone wire belonging to the second defendants, which had been lying on the ground and resting on top on aerial electricity lines belonging to the first defendants.

Although a mass of evidence was produced at the trial of the action the facts of the case are simple and not greatly in dispute. On 3 December 1962 at about 12.30 p.m. the plaintiff's son named Kirpal Singh (PW3) was driving his father's herd of buffaloes home, after grazing them, along the left grass verge of Kapar Road in the direction of Klang in a single file, he being on the metal part of the road just beside the third buffalo in the file so as to keep them off the road. When he was at or near the second milestone, Kapar Road, the three buffaloes in front suddenly dropped on the ground. He looked behind and saw that two more buffaloes had fallen down. His dog which was following behind the buffaloes came running forward, but when it was some distance from the fallen buffaloes it yelped in pain, fell down and lay still. Four more buffaloes fell on the metal portion of the road, but they got up and moved to the middle of the road. The five buffaloes which fell on the grass did not get up again. He went near the fallen buffaloes and saw a thin dark wire underneath them.

Ishak bin Aminuddin (PW2) was sitting on the steps of his house at the second mile, Kapar Road when the accident happened. His evidence is that his radio gave out noises of crackling and explosion. There was crackling and explosion on the overhead electric wires leading to his house. He also saw fire on the electric wires, and he heard the noise made by the buffaloes. There was a wire wrapped round the body of one of the buffaloes. The buffalo fell to the ground and so did some other buffaloes one by one. He saw a dog jumping and barking and then fall on a coil of wire and die.

His evidence as regards the telephone wire is that a rubber tree had fallen down during a storm at about 8 a.m. on 30 November 1962, causing the telephone wires to snap, but he made no report about it to anybody. At about 6 p.m. on the same day he noticed that the telephone wires had been repaired, although one wire was left resting over the electric wires leading to his house and dangling. The electric wires, however, were intact and had not snapped and fallen on the ground. The telephone wire which had been left dangling lay across the path to his house, and his wife or one of his children had to lift it up to let his car pass every time he went out of his house or came back.

This witness denied under cross-examination that the telephone wires had fallen down on 3 December 1962, although he conceded that it was difficult for him to say, after a period of four years whether there was rain and storm on 3 December 1962. The only part of his evidence which has caused me some anxiety is his statement that the telephone wires had been repaired and that several wires had fallen down. However, as he had not actually seen any repairs being carried out, I had no reason to doubt his story that at least one telephone wire was left dangling over the electricity wire and resting on the ground for a period of three days. He is an independent witness and I accept his story that this telephone wire had to be lifted up whenever he took his car out and brought it back.

Mr. Liew G Hoe (DW2), an electrical engineer employed by the first defendants, on being informed about the accident at about 12.30 p.m. proceeded immediately to the scene. He inspected the electrical installations and found them to be in order. The electricity service wires leading from a pole to the consumers across the road were intact, but there was a telephone wire resting on them and trailing in coils along the ground by the side of the ditch. He saw a few buffaloes and a