H S E B Vs. RAM NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court dated 11-12-1997. It appears that a five-year-old child died as a result of coming into contact with a high-tension wire which passed over the roof of her house. The parents, therefore, filed a writ petition claiming compensation against the appellants. The High Court applying the principle of res ipsa loquitur directed payment of Rs 1 lakh as compensation.

(2.) Reliance is placed upon the case of Chairman, Grid Corpn. of Orissa Ltd. (GRIDCO) v. Sukamani Das1 wherein a person walking along the road came in contact with a live wire which was lying on the road after having got snapped from the overhead electric line. The writ petition was filed claiming compensation. The High Court directed payment of compensation. However, this Court held that disputed questions of fact arose and that a writ petition was not a proper remedy. On the basis of this authority, it is urged that even in this case disputed questions of fact arose and that, therefore, the High court should not have entertained the writ petition.

(3.) In order to consider this submission, one has to look at the averments made in the petition and the reply to those averments. In para (2) of the petition it is stated as follows: