Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to a second appeal filed by the defendants (HESCOM officials) against the judgment and decree dated 22.02.2011 passed in R.A. No.52/2010 by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Ranebennur, which dismissed their appeal against the decree dated 23.04.2010 in O.S. No.11/2010 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge and II Addl. JMFC, Ranebennur, decreeing the suit for recovery of compensation. The plaintiffs, being the wife, minor son, and mother of the deceased Basavaraj, filed the suit claiming compensation for his death due to electrocution. The facts reveal that on 18.06.2009, the deceased Basavaraj came into contact with a live electric wire that was sagging and hanging at ground level near his agricultural land, resulting in his instantaneous death. The plaintiffs alleged negligence on the part of the defendants in maintaining the electric lines. The defendants denied negligence and contended that the death was due to the deceased's own negligence. The trial court decreed the suit, awarding compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of suit till realization. The lower appellate court confirmed the decree. In the second appeal, the High Court framed a substantial question of law regarding the sustainability of the concurrent findings. The court held that the principle of res ipsa loquitur applied, as the live wire was found sagging at ground level, and the defendants failed to rebut the presumption of negligence. The court also noted that the defendants did not examine any witness to prove that they had taken proper care. The compensation amount was found to be just and reasonable. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.
Headnote
A) Tort Law - Negligence - Res Ipsa Loquitur - Death by Electrocution - The principle of res ipsa loquitur applies where a live electric wire was found sagging and hanging at ground level, causing death. The burden shifts to the electricity board to prove absence of negligence. (Paras 3-5) B) Electricity Law - Liability of Electricity Board - Strict Liability - Sections 67, 68 of Electricity Act, 2003 read with Rule 91 of Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 - The electricity board is liable for compensation if it fails to maintain its lines in safe condition. The court held that the defendants failed to prove that they had taken all reasonable care. (Paras 4-6) C) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Section 100 CPC - Substantial Question of Law - The finding of negligence based on evidence is a question of fact and cannot be interfered with in second appeal unless perverse. The court found no perversity in the concurrent findings. (Paras 7-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of the lower appellate court dismissing the appeal against the decree for compensation for death due to electrocution is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed with costs. The judgment and decree of the lower appellate court are confirmed.
Law Points
- Negligence
- Res Ipsa Loquitur
- Strict Liability
- Compensation for Death
- Electricity Act
- 2003
- Indian Electricity Rules
- 1956
