UNION OF INDIA Vs. IQBAL BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants, through the medium of instant appeal, have challenged the judgment and decree dtd. 22/11/2012 (for short 'impugned judgment') passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Srinagar in suit No. 5/Pauper titled Abdul Karim Rohella (through legal heirs) Vs. Union of India and Ors., for recovery of damages and compensation, whereby the appellants and respondent Nos. 5 and 6 were directed to pay respondents/plaintiffs an amount of Rs.24.00 lacs with Rs.1.00 lac on account of mental shock and Rs.50,000.00 as suit costs, along-with simple interest @ 6% per annum, from the date of decree.

(2.) The factual background of the case is that the suit was presented in forma-paupris and in terms of the trial court order dtd. 2/12/1998 leave has been granted to the respondents herein to sue as an indigent person. The claim for damages was on the allegation that the personnel of the appellants on 12/6/1993 have killed the son of the plaintiff Abdul Karim Rohella namely Tariq Parvaiz Rohella by shooting him deliberately. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff Abdul Karim Rohella died and his legal heirs (present respondents 1 to 4) were brought on record and the suit was decided in terms of the impugned judgment dtd. 22/11/2012 in favour of the plaintiffs/respondents 1 to 4 and against the appellants as well as respondents 5 and 6. The compensation of Rs.24.00 lacs plus Rs.1.00 lac on account of mental shock and agony, and Rs.50,000.00 as suit costs was decreed.

(3.) Respondents/plaintiffs in the suit had pleaded that the deceased Tariq Parvaiz Rohella, who was 27 years of age at the time of his killing by the security forces of 4th Bn. BSF, was a deliberate attempt and the said deceased was tied with a pole at Sheikh Dawood Colony, Batmaloo. An FIR No. 114/93 was lodged in this regard in the Police Station, Sheerghari. It was further pleaded in the suit that the deceased was dealing in wholesale business of food stuffs and kiryana, where he had invested an amount of Rs.2.55 lacs with monthly earnings of Rs.8000.0010000/-. The deceased, as contended in the suit, had invested all the earnings of the plaintiff/father who was retired Government Teacher. Besides, loan was also raised from J&K Bank Branch, Batamaloo. The untimely assassination of the plaintiff's son engulfed the plaintiff and his family into permanent wail subjecting the plaintiff and his family to deprivation besides inflicting horror, shock and agony as they were deprived of the sole bread earner. It was further stated that had the deceased's son not been killed and allowed to live his normal life he would have earned in coming 40 years more than two crores and since the plaintiff and his family have been deprived of this income, as such, defendants (appellants and respondent Nos. 5 and 6 herein) are bound to pay the amount to the plaintiff as the murder had been committed by the security forces during the course of their employment, exposing the defendants to this liability.