D GOVINDASAMY Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR PERAMBALUR DISTRICT PERAMBALUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "TAMIL" "Rain or thunder shower or isolated rain would occur at many places" This is usual weather report issued by Meteorological Centre. Many times it was proved to be correct or otherwise also. We experience unexpected heavy rain fall which could not be forecast by Weather Centre. Expecting heavy rain as forecast by the center, schools, some times used to be closed. However that day would turn out to be a bright and clear sunny day. Therefore we cannot predict the events of nature. That is the reason why they are called "Acts of God". (natural events) As per Wharton's Law Lexicon "Act of God" mean, a direct, violent, sudden and irresistible act of nature, which could not, by any reasonable care, have been foreseen or resisted. As per R. F. v Henstone Salmond on the Law of Torts, 330 Edn. 1977 "Act of God" means, an overwhelming, un-preventable event caused exclusively by forces of nature, such as an earthquake, flood, or tornado. The definition has been statutorily broadened to include all natural phenomena that are exceptional, inevitable and irresistible, the effects of which could not be prevented or avoided by the exercise of due care of foresight, Black Law Dictionary, 7th Edition. It may be defined to be any accident, due directly and exclusively to natural causes without human intervention, which by no amount of foresight, pains or care, reasonably to have been expected, could have been prevented. The general characteristics of such perils are very intelligble.

(2.) IT is said monsoonal and other then weather additions in India are unstable. A person who lost his wife due to "Act of Nature" or "Act of God" knocks the doors of this court challenging the order dated 19. 09. 2002 passed by the respondent rejecting petitioner's claim from the Prime Minister's Relief Fund for the death of his wife who was struck by thunder and died on 23. 09. 1998. The petitioner gave a representation to the State and Central Government seeking exgratio payment from the State Government and also from Prime Minister's Relief Fund.

(3.) PURSUANT to the order of this Court, the respondent recommended the petitioner's case for grant of relief under Prime Minister's Relief Fund for the death of his wife through a communication bearing No. Na. Ka. C2/22569/2002 dated 19. 09. 2002. However, subsequently by an order dated 19. 02. 2003, the petitioner's claim was rejected by the respondent stating that relief was granted upto 1999 only to those who died during the North East Monsoon season namely October to December alone and as the petitioner's wife died on 23. 09. 1998, the same was rejected. The said order is being challenged before this court.