ARULMERI Vs. SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WIFE , who lost her husband due to electrocution on 11.05.2006, has sought for compensation of Rs.5 lakhs from the respondents.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, her husband was a fisherman. On 11.05.2006, when he was returning home, at 10.00 p.m., along with his brother, he came in contact with a live wire, which fell on him and he died instantaneously. The factum of death was reported to Sayalkudi Police Station on 12.05.2006 and that a criminal case was registered in Crime No.160 of 2006. Post-mortem was done on 12.05.2006. The Post-mortem doctor gave a report that the death was due to electric shock. For the death of the petitioner's husband, the respondents are liable to pay compensation. It is the case of the petitioner that on the date of accident, her husband was aged 29 years. He is survived by the petitioner and a 2-1/2 years old female child. It is her further contention that as fisherman, he earned Rs.7,000.00 per month. She was wholly depending on her husband and after his demise, the family is helpless, put on financial constraint and mental agony. Though representations were made to the respondents seeking compensation, there was no response. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition for the relief, stated supra.

(3.) THE Superintending Engineer, Ramanathapuram, has further submitted that due to unprecedented heavy rain, the electric line, though properly connected, were mutilated and due to that, the accident had occurred. The respondents have denied negligence on the part of the Board in maintaining the wires. He has also submitted that even in the Police complaint, no allegation against the Electricity Board has been levelled. According to him, the petitioner has to prove the manner of accident and negligence on the part of the Board. For the abovesaid reasons, he has prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.