Karnataka High Court
Chikkamma vs Superintendent Engineer on 24 March, 2025
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:12435
RFA No. 2356 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No. 2356 OF 2023 (RES)
BETWEEN:
1. CHIKKAMMA
W/O LATE RAJANAIKA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
2. SHIVU
S/O LATE RAJANAIKA
AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS.
3. SHILPA
D/O LATE RAJANAIKA
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS.
4. THAYAMMA
W/O CHIKKANAYAKA
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
Digitally SINCE APPELLANT No.2 AND 3
signed by ARE MINORS, THEY ARE REPRESENTED
NIRMALA
DEVI BY NATURAL GUARDIAN i.e., APPELLANT No.1
Location: ALL ARE R/O KOLAGALA GRAMA
HIGH COURT HAMPAPURA HOBLI
OF H D KOTE TALUK
KARNATAKA
MYSURU DISTRICT - 570 001.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI GIRISH B BALADARE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER
CHESCOM,
SRI HARSHA ROAD
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:12435
RFA No. 2356 of 2023
M.P.L. COMPOUND,
MYSORE DISTRICT - 570 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI H V DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE
1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
25.11.2021 PASSED IN OS No.776/2019 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM., MYSURU., DECREEING THE SUIT
FOR RELIEF OF DAMAGES AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and
decree dated 25.11.2021 passed in O.S.No.776/2019 by the
Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mysuru, whereby the said
suit filed by the appellants - plaintiffs for compensation on account
of the demise of one late Rajanaika due to electrocution in the year
2015 was partly decreed in favour of the appellants, thereby
awarding compensation of Rs.6,91,000/- together with interest at
8% p.a. from the date of suit till realization.
2. This appeal is preferred by the appellants/plaintiffs
seeking enhancement of the compensation aggrieved by the
impugned judgment and decree.
NC: 2025:KHC:12435
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
counsel for the respondent - CHESCOM and perused the material
on record.
4. The material on record discloses that the appellants -
plaintiffs being the wife, children and mother of late Rajanaika, who
died as a result of electrocution in the year 2015, instituted the
aforesaid suit for compensation and other reliefs against the
respondent - defendant. The said suit was contested by the
respondent - CHESCOM, pursuant to which, the Trial Court
framed the issues and after recording oral and documentary
evidence of both sides, proceeded to pass the impugned judgment
and decree awarding Rs.6,91,000/- by way of compensation to the
appellants. It is the grievance of the appellants that the quantum of
compensation awarded is meager and inadequate and as such,
they are before this Court by way of the present appeal seeking
enhancement of compensation.
5. Upon re-appreciation, re-evaluation and
re-consideration of the entire material on record, I am of the
considered opinion that the compensation awarded by the Trial
NC: 2025:KHC:12435
Court deserves to be re-worked and enhanced by taking into
account the notional income of the deceased Rajanaika 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 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs PRANAY
SETHI AND OTHERS reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680; SARLA
VERMA vs DELHI TRANSPORT COPORATION reported in AIR
2009 SC 3104 and MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
LIMITED vs NANU RAM ALIAS CHUHRU RAM AND OTHERS
reported in (2018 ACJ 2782 (SC) ). The said principle directing
payment of compensation in electrocution related death cases has
been followed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) AND ANOTHER vs SMT D.V.
BHAGYA AND ANOTHER in RFA No.493/2019 - DD 17.02.2020.
6. Under this circumstances, the compensation payable
in favour of appellants/plaintiffs is to be worked as under:
Notional Income in 2015 as per
Lok Adalat guidelines Rs.9,000/- p.m.
40% future prospects Rs.3,600/-
(-) 1/4rd towards personal expenses Rs.3,150/-
NC: 2025:KHC:12435
Annual income = Rs.9450 x 12 x 16 = Rs.18,14,400/-
Funeral Expenses = Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of estate = Rs. 15,000/-
Filial Consortium = Rs. 1,30,000/-
(wife=40,000/- + children(2) 3x30,000/-
Mother = 30,000/-)
TOTAL = Rs.19,74,400/-
(-)Compensation awarded by Trial Court = Rs.6,91,000/-
Balance payable = Rs. 12,83,400/-
7. In the result, I pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) Appeal is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and decree dated 25.11.2021
passed in O.S.No.776/2019 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and
CJM, Mysuru, is hereby modified.
(iii) Appellants are entitled to additional compensation of
Rs.12,83,400/- in addition to Rs.6,91,000/- already awarded by the
Trial Court.
(iv) Additional compensation of Rs.12,83,400/- shall carry
interest at 6% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till
payment.
NC: 2025:KHC:12435
(v) However, the appellants are not entitled to any interest for
the delayed period, if any, in the appeal.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)
JUDGE
ND
