Madras High Court
N.Rajendran vs The Chairman on 2 August, 2022
W.P(MD)No.20520 of 2016
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02.08.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.P(MD)No.20520 of 2016
and
W.M.P(MD)No.14692 of 2016
N.Rajendran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Chairman,
TANGEDCO Ltd.,
144, Anna Salai,
Chennai-600 002.
2.The Superintendent Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Kanyakumari Electricity Distribution Circle,
Parvathipuram, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
3.The Assistant Executive Engineer(Distribution),
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Kulasekharam, Cheruppaloor Post,
Kanyakumari District.
4.The Junior Engineer(Distribution),
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Veeyanoor, Veeyranoor Post,
Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
W.P(MD)No.20520 of 2016
respondents to pay a compensation and damages of Rs. 10,00,000/-
(Rupees Ten Lakh only), with 9% of accrued interest per annum, to the
petitioner, for causing death to the petitioners deceased son R.Arjun,
aged about 13 years, due to the negligent act of the respondents.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Kishore
For Respondents : Mr.S.Deena Dhayalan
Standing Counsel
ORDER
The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the
respondent board to pay compensation for the death of the petitioner’s
son due to electrocution.
2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner’s son, aged about 13
years old, while he was walking on his way to take bath near a small
stream, he had come in contact with the live electric wire, which was
lying on the pathway and he got electrocuted and passed away.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the live electric wire
got disconnected and it was hanging up to the ground level and this has
happened only due to the negligence on the part of the respondent board.
Hence, they liable to pay a compensation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20520 of 2016
3. Per contra, the learned standing counsel for the respondent
board has filed a counter and had contended that though the boy had died
due to electrocution, the live wire was only hanging in the air and it has
not touched the ground. Had it touched the ground, the supply could
have got automatically disconnected. The boy has wantonly touched the
live wire hanging in the air and he has got electrocuted. The learned
standing counsel also referred to the post mortem report, which discloses
that the boy has got burnt injuries only in his forearm and not in his legs.
Hence, he prayed that the accident has happened only due to the playful
activities of the boy and there is no negligence on the part of the board to
make is liable to pay compensation.
4. I have carefully considered the submissions made on either side.
5. There is no dispute that the petitioner’s son, aged about 13 years
had died due to the electrocution on 14.06.2015. According to the
petitioner, the live wire was touching the ground and the boy got in touch
with the live electric wire and got electrocuted. But the case of the
respondent is that the live wire had not touched the ground, but it was
only hanging in the air. In paragraph no.4 of the counter affidavit, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20520 of 2016
respondent board has contended that due to heavy rain and wind, a single
phase three wire line had fallen from the pole due to the failure of LT
shackle metal parts and hanging over the phase line. This would clearly
indicate that the shackle metal parts have not been properly maintained,
due to which the live wire got disconnected and it had started hanging in
the air. Hence, it is clear that there is negligence on the part of the
respondent board.
6. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the boy is
around 13 years old and he had passed away in the year 2015. The
respondent board as per their own board proceedings, have fixed
compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) for fatal
accidents that had occurred due to electrocution. The learned counsel for
the petitioner has referred to a judgment of this Court in W.P(MD)No.
37159 of 2015, dated 28.01.2022 (S.Saraswathi Vs. The Chairman,
TANGEDCO and others), wherein this Court has awarded the said
compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs only) for the
electrocution of a 11 year old boy, who died in the year 2014. I am
inclined to follow the said judgment.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20520 of 2016
7. In view of the above said judgment, the respondent board is
directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs only) to the
writ petitioner as a compensation and interest at the rate of 6% interest
from 15.06.2015 till the date of payment. The payment shall be effected
within a period of twelve(12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.
8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
02.08.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
gbg
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20520 of 2016
To
1.The Chairman,
TANGEDCO Ltd.,
144, Anna Salai,
Chennai-600 002.
2.The Superintendent Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Kanyakumari Electricity Distribution Circle,
Parvathipuram, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
3.The Assistant Executive Engineer(Distribution),
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Kulasekharam, Cheruppaloor Post,
Kanyakumari District.
4.The Junior Engineer(Distribution),
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Veeyanoor, Veeyranoor Post,
Kanyakumari District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20520 of 2016
R.VIJAYAKUMAR ,J.
gbg
Order made in
W.P(MD)No.20520 of 2016
Dated:
02.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
