Karnataka High Court
Superintending Engineer (Ele) vs Smt Susheela on 18 December, 2023
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:45976
RFA No. 1704 of 2022
C/W RFA No. 212 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1704 OF 2022 (RES)
C/W
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 212 OF 2022(RES)
IN RFA No.1704/2022:
BETWEEN:
1. SUSHEELA
W/O LATE CHANNAVEERAIAH
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS.
2. NAGARATHNA
D/O LATE CHANNAVEERAIAH
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS.
3. VEERABHADRAIAH
S/O LATE CHANNAVEERAIAH
AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS.
2ND AND 3RD PLAINTIFFS ARE MINORS
Digitally
signed by REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN 1ST PLAINTIFF
VANDANA S ALL ARE R/O KABBINADA SETHUVE
Location: (K. B. S PALYA, CHIKKONAHALLI POST
HIGH COURT
OF KASABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK
KARNATAKA TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 101.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI GIRISH B BALADARE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER
BESCOM, O AND M CIRCLE
OLD KOTHITHOPU ROAD
TUMAKURU - 572 101.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI H V DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:45976
RFA No. 1704 of 2022
C/W RFA No. 212 of 2022
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE
1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
10.11.2021 PASSED IN OS No.563/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, TUMAKURU, PARTLY
DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DAMAGES AND ETC.,
IN RFA No.212/2022:
BETWEEN:
SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER(ELE)
BESCOM
O & M CIRCLE, OLD KOTHITHOPU ROAD
TUMAKURU - 572 102.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI H V DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SUSHEELA
W/O LATE CHANNAVEERAIAH
PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.
2. NAGARATHNA
D/O LATE CHANNAVEERAIAH
PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS.
3. VEERABHADRAIAH
S/O LATE CHANNAVEERAIAH
PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS.
RESPONDENT No.3 BEING THE MINOR
REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND
NATURAL GUARDIAN, SMT. SUSHEELA.
RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT
KABBINADA SETHUVE
K.B.S.PALYA, CHIKKONAHALLI POST
KASABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK
TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 216.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI GIRISH B BALADHRE, ADVOCATE)
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:45976
RFA No. 1704 of 2022
C/W RFA No. 212 of 2022
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.11.2021 PASSED IN OS
No.563/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND CJM, TUMAKURU, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR
DAMAGES AND ETC.,
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Both these appeals arise out of the impugned judgment and
decree dated 10.11.2021 passed in O.S No.563/2019 by the Addl.
Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumakuru, whereby the said suit filed
seeking compensation against the respondent - defendant by the
appellants - plaintiffs, who are wife and children of the deceased
Channaveeraiah, who died on account of electrocution, was partly
decreed by the trial Court. By the impugned judgment and decree,
the trial Court declared that the plaintiffs were entitled to a sum of
Rs.10,48,000/- together with interest @ 6% PA from the date of suit
till payment from the respondent - defendant Authority.
2. RFA No.1704/2022 is preferred by the appellants -
plaintiffs seeking enhancement of the compensation, while RFA
No.212/2022 is preferred by the respondent - defendant for setting
aside the impugned judgment and decree passed by the trial Court.
NC: 2023:KHC:45976
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.
4. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that
appellants - plaintiffs are the wife and minor children of the
deceased Channaveeraiah, who died due to electrocution on
12.03.2017 at about 12.30 p.m., when he was plucking the betel
leaves, in Sy.No.29 of Kabbinadasethuve Palya, Kasaba Hobli,
Gubbi Taluk, he came in contact with the laying electric live wire
and received an electric shock due to the negligent act of the
respondent - defendant.
5. The respondent - defendant having contested the suit,
the appellants - plaintiffs examined plaintiff No.1 as PW-1 and
Exs.P1 to P6 were marked. An Official of BESCOM was examined
as DW-1 on behalf of the respondent - defendant and no
documents were marked.
6. After hearing the parties, the trial Court came to the
conclusion that the demise of Channaveeraiah was on account of
negligence on the part of BESCOM Authorities and consequently,
answered Issue Nos.1 and 2 in favour of the appellants - plaintiffs.
NC: 2023:KHC:45976
Insofar as quantum of damages are concerned, the trial court
awarded a sum of Rs.10,48,000/- in favour of the appellants -
plaintiffs together with interest @ 6% PA from the date of suit till the
date of payment from the respondent - defendant Authority.
7. Upon re-appreciation, re-evaluation and
re-consideration of entire material on record, I am of the considered
opinion that the compensation awarded by the trial Court deserves
to be re-worked and enhanced by taking into account the notional
income of the deceased Channaveeraiah and bearing in mind the
principles related to payment of compensation in motor vehicle
accident cases as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of
(i) NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs PRANAY
SETHI AND OTHERS - (2017) 16 SCC 680; (ii) SARLA VERMA
vs DELHI TRANSPORT COPORATION - AIR 2009 SC 3104 and
MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs. NANU
RAM ALIAS CHUHRU RAM AND OTHERS - (2018 ACJ 2782
(SC). The said principle directing payment of compensation in
electrocution related death cases has been followed by the Hon'ble
Division Bench of this Court in the case of EXECUTIVE
NC: 2023:KHC:45976
ENGINEER (ELE) AND ANOTHER vs SMT D.V. BHAGYA AND
ANOTHER - RFA No.493/2019 - DD 17.02.2020.
8. Under this circumstances, the compensation payable
in favour of appellants - plaintiffs is re-worked as under:
The trail Court has awarded
compensation : Rs.10,48,000/-
The appellants claims the
compensation as under as per
Karnataka Legal Service Committee
the Income to be taken the
accident year 2017 : Rs.11,000/-
25% future prospectus to be
added to the total income : Rs.2,750/-
Total income : Rs.13,750/-
1/3rd income to be deducted
towards personal expenses. : - Rs. 4,583/-
Annual Income comes to
(Rs.9,167x12x14) : Rs.15,40,056/-
Funeral expenses : Rs.15,000/-
Towards Estate : Rs.15,000/-
Filial Consortium:
Wife : 40,000/-
Son : 30,000/-
Daughter: 30,000/-
Total : : Rs.1,00,000/-
------------------
Rs.16,70,056/-
NC: 2023:KHC:45976
Compensation awarded by
trail Court : Rs.10,48,000/-
Balance amount
(Rs.16,70,056 - Rs.10,48,000) : Rs. 6,22,056/-
Amount already paid to appellants : Rs. NIL
Enhanced amount entitled
by appellants : Rs.6,22,056/-
9. Accordingly, the appellants-plaintiffs are entitled for
additional enhanced compensation in a sum of Rs.6,22,056/- as
against the amount awarded by the trial Court with 6% p.a. from the
date of petition / suit till realization or deposit.
10. In the result, I pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) RFA No.1704/2022 filed by the appellants - plaintiffs is
partly allowed.
(ii) RFA No.212/2022 is hereby dismissed.
(iii) The impugned judgment and decree dated 10.11.2021
passed in O.S.No.563/2019 by the trial Court is hereby modified.
NC: 2023:KHC:45976
(iv) The appellants - plaintiffs are entitled to additional
enhanced compensation of Rs.6,22,056/- payable by the
respondent - defendant to the appellants - plaintiffs together with
interest at the rate of 6% PA from the date of suit till the date of
payment.
(v) The appellants - plaintiffs would not be entitled to the
interest for the delayed period in the appeal.
The amount in deposit is directed to be transferred to the trial
Court for disbursement.
Registry to draw decree accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GH
