AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD Vs. LAD KANWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal under Sec. 96 CPC has been filed against the judgment and decree dtd. 4/4/2008 passed by the Additional District Judge No.1 Sikar, in Suit No.118/2005(61/2005), whereby and whereunder decreeing the suit claiming compensation under the Indian Fatal Accident Act, 1855 allowed compensation Rs.3,96,000.00 to plaintiffs against appellant AVVNL on account of death of their husband, father and son due to electrocution.

(2.) The facts of the case are that respondents plaintiffs (hereafter 'the plaintiffs') filed a civil suit claiming compensation on account of accidental death of husband, father and son Shobh Singh, aged 30 years, who died on 6/5/2005 because of electrocution, while he climbed on kikar tree for cutting branches for feeding his cattle, at the same time current from electricity line of 11000 KV, which was loose and passed through the tree, and Shobh Singh died on the spot. It was stated that About 5-7 days ago a pole of electricity line, which was passing through the field of deceased, was broken and the personnel of electricity department used the same pole for raising the electricity line, due to which the same was loose and while the deceased Shobh Singh tried to cut branches of tree he came into contact of the electricity current, as wires were not seen due to leaves and branches of the tree. As such alleging negligence on the part of defendants suit was filed claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.27,40,000.00.

(3.) On issuing notices appellants-defendants AVVNL filed written statement and denied the allegation of negligence and also denied that any pole was broken or electricity line was changed. It was stated that at the time of laying electricity line there was no branch of tree, which were grown more and reached upto electricity line which was not seen by the deceased, therefore it was carelessness of the deceased who climbed on such tree for cutting branches. Therefore, defendants are not responsible for the death of deceased. It was stated that defendants did not commit any carelessness in their duty and accordingly prayed for dismissal of suit.