N. BALAKRISHNAN Vs. TMT KANAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 21.04.2013 passed in W.C.No.467 of 2007 is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

(2.) The Substantial Question of law raised in the appeal, which reads as under:

(3.) The respondents/claimants filed an application under Section 22 of the Workmen Compensation Act on the ground that on 03.05.2007, the applicants' son Ramesh was working in the opposite party's Prince Autoliners Company premises at Belagondapalli to construct an additional building. There is a High Tension E.B wire passing very nearer to the proposed construction and that before starting construction, the said deceased Ramesh and other co-workers informed to the opposite party that there is electricity passes through the High Tension E.B line and hence only after stop the electricity, they will able to start construction. For that the opposite party said that, already told to the Electricity Board to stop the electricity in the said High Tension E.B line and no electricity passess through the said High Tension E.B line and asked the deceased and other co-workers to start construction works. Believing the words of the opposite party, the deceased and other co-workers have started the construction works. But on the fateful day on 30.05.2007 at about 04.30 p.m when the applicants' son Ramesh doing Mason work on the top of the wooden poles, the electricity passed through the said wooden poles, which was stood for construction work, and that the applicants' son fell down from the top of the wooden poles due to electric shock. Immediately, after the accident, the deceased Ramesh was taken to the Government Hospital, Hosur for treatment. But, he died on way to the hospital, due to electric shock. He died only due to the opposite party's own negligence. A case has been registered as Crime No.125/2007, under Section 174 of Cr.P.C of Mathigiri Police Station.