MANAGING DIRECTOR, WESCO Vs. MANINI MAJHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants who are defendant Nos.3 to 5 before the learned trial court have preferred this appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 4.1.2006 and 10.1.2006, respectively, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bonai in Civil Suit No.1 of 2005. Respondent No.1 is the plaintiff and Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are D.1 and D.2 before the court below. Learned court below decreed the suit on contest against all the defendants but held the present appellants liable to pay damages to the tune of Rs.5,02,223/- to the plaintiff- respondent No.1.

(2.) CASE of the plaintiff-Respondent No.1, in short, is that at the relevant time she was a student of +2 1st Year Science reading in Jadupati College, Kalia Bihar, village Sihidiha in Bonai Sub-Division. There is one 11 K.V. electric connection to the said College which is maintained, repaired and look after by the defendant-appellants. Due to bending of the support pole, the live conductor got sagged and it was hanging at a very low height in semicircular way. On 2.2.2004 the plaintiff's hand came in contact with the live electric wire resulting in severe burn injuries. Immediately, she was shifted to Rourkela and was admitted in the I.G. Hospital, Rourkela where she was admitted and got treatment from 2.2.2004 to 2.4.2004. In the process of her treatment, her right hand had to be amputed to save her life. Several other parts of her body were also affected due to the said accident and despite of such prolonged treatment those parts developed deformity for which she has become incapable of discharging her normal function and her future has become doomed. Claiming that the incident occurred as a result of callous negligence of the defendants, she filed the suit claiming Rs.4 lakhs as damages towards pain, anxiety and mental agony; attendant cost; loss of marital prospect; and deprivation of educational career. In addition to that she also claimed compensation of Rs.41,087/- towards hospital charges, Rs.5,000/- towards cost of an attendant during the period of her treatment, Rs.1,000/- towards conveyance expenses and Rs.55,136.52 towards cost of medicines. D.1 and D.2 who are respondent Nos.2 and 3 in this appeal filed their written statement contending that in view of the provisions of Orissa Electricity Reform Act, 1995 and the Transfer Scheme Rules 1998 framed thereunder, the suit is not maintainable against them. According to them it is M/s WESCO which is the Distribution and Retail Supply Licensee for the Western Zone within which the incident has allegedly occurred.

(3.) BEFORE the court below each side examined two witnesses. P.W.1 is the victim, P.W.2 is her father, D.Ws.1 and 2 are two officials of the D.3 to 5. Learned trial court framed the following issues: Issues (i) Whether the plaintiff has got any cause of action to file the suit ? (ii) Whether the plaintiff sustained any injuries due to electrocution by coming in contact with live wire supplied from 11 KV transformer to Jadupati College, Sihidiha on 2.2.04 ? (iii) Whether the right hand of plaintiff was amputed during course of treatment on account of electrocution and was disfigured ? (iv) Whether the alleged electrocution to the plaintiff was caused by any negligence on account of defendants No.1 & 2 or by defendants No.3 to 5 ? (v) Whether the suit is maintainable ? (vi) To what other relief the plaintiff is entitled for ? Answering all the issues in favour of the plaintiff, the learned trial court decreed the suit and awarded the amount claimed in the plaint.