Madras High Court
The Corporation Of Chennai vs Kumari on 13 June, 2022
W.A.No.2237 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.06.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T. RAJA
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. KUMARESH BABU
W.A.No.2237 of 2018
and
C.M.P.No.17821 of 2018
1.The Corporation of Chennai
Represented by its Superintending Engineer – Electrical,
Electrical Department,
Corporation of Chennai,
Rippon Building,
Chennai – 600 003.
2.The Corporation of Chennai,
Represented by its Divisional Electrical Engineer-North,
Corporation of Chennai,
Rippon Building,
Chennai – 600 003. ... Appellants
Vs.
1.Kumari
2.The State of Tamil Nadu
Represented by the Secretary of Government,
Energy Department,
Secretariat,
St.George Fort,
Chennai – 600 009.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
W.A.No.2237 of 2018
3.The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Represented by its Chairman,
N.P.K.R.R. Maaligai,
Electricity Avenue,
44, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600 002.
4.Office of Assistant Engineer,
Kodungaiyur Electricity Department,
Kodungaiyur,
Chennai – 600 118. ... Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order
dated 04.12.2017 made in W.P.No.18983 of 2013.
For Appellants : Mrs.Kaarthika Ashok
Standing Counsel
For R1 : Mr.V.S.Senthil Kumar
For R2 : Mr.V.Manoharan
Additional Government Pleader
For R3 & R4 : Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh
for TNEB
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by T. RAJA, J.)
The Corporation of Chennai, represented by its Superintending
Engineer (Electrical), Electricity Department, Rippon Building, Chennai, has
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2237 of 2018
brought this appeal, challenging the correctness of the impugned order, dated
04.12.2017, made in W.P.No.18983 of 2013, awarding compensation of
Rs.10,38,000/- to the 1st respondent, on the ground that the death of the
husband of the 1st respondent, caused by electrocution, had occurred only due
to the negligence/carelessness on the part of the officials of the appellant
Corporation, in removing the live wire, as a result of which, the deceased,
coming in contact with the live wire, died due to electrocution.
2.Mrs.Kaarthika Ashok, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
appellants, after arguing the matter, submitted that, although the appeal was
filed by her predecessor, assailing each and every finding of the learned Single
Judge impugned herein, so far as the quantum of compensation is concerned,
she pleaded that atleast the rate of interest could be modified as 7.5% p.a.
instead of 12% p.a. and also submitted that, generally, in matters like this,
wherever death occurs due to electrocution to any passer-by, the Government
have a consistent stand to award a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-, but in the present case,
the learned Single Judge has awarded Rs.10,38,000/-. Therefore, if the rate of
interest, as prayed earlier, is modified, no prejudice would be caused to the 1 st
respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2237 of 2018
3.We are unable to find any justification in the submissions of the
learned Standing Counsel for the following reasons. The deceased was found
to be the sole bread-winner of his family and he used to go to the nearby shop
everyday in the morning to buy milk. On 10.01.2013, at about 05.30 a.m., the
deceased went to the nearby shop to buy milk. Without knowing that the
electricity cable was cut and lying on the road unattended, he stamped the
electricity cable and due to the high voltage current passing into him, he fell on
the ground and died. As a result, the family of the deceased had lost their only
breadwinner. On the basis of the registration of FIR in Crime No.67 of 2013
and the Post-Mortem report issued by the Government Stanley Hospital, in
which also, the reason for death has been shown as electrocution, finally, the
learned Single Judge has come to the conclusion that the live wire was left
unattended by the staff/officers belonging to the Corporation, as a result, an
innocent passer-by lost his life and consequently, the family of the deceased
had suffered loss of sole breadwinner and thereby, allowed the writ petition and
awarded compensation of Rs.10,38,000/-. We do not find any error in the
approach of the learned Single Judge in allowing the writ petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2237 of 2018
4.Coming to the request made by Mrs.Kaarthika Ashok, learned
Standing Counsel, to modify the interest portion, as the amount of
Rs.10,38,000/- has been quantified as total compensation payable and till date,
the appellant has not paid the amount, we do not find any merit in her
submission.
5.Therefore, the writ appeal fails and stands dismissed.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
6.The appellants are granted four months' time to pay the entire
compensation amount of Rs.10,38,000/-, as directed by the learned Single
Judge, to the 1st respondent. If the amount is not paid within the period of four
months from the date of the order, the appellants will be liable to pay
Rs.25,000/- as costs to the 1st respondent.
(T.R., J.) (K.B., J.)
13.06.2022
mkn
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order / Nonspeaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2237 of 2018
To
1.The Superintending Engineer – Electrical,
Corporation of Chennai
Electrical Department,
Corporation of Chennai,
Rippon Building,
Chennai – 600 003.
2.The Divisional Electrical Engineer-North,
Corporation of Chennai,
Corporation of Chennai,
Rippon Building,
Chennai – 600 003.
3.The Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu
Energy Department,
Secretariat,
St.George Fort,
Chennai – 600 009.
4.The Chairman,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
N.P.K.R.R. Maaligai,
Electricity Avenue,
44, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600 002.
5.The Assistant Engineer,
Kodungaiyur Electricity Department,
Kodungaiyur,
Chennai – 600 118.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2237 of 2018
T. RAJA, J.
and
K. KUMARESH BABU, J.
mkn
W.A.No.2237 of 2018
13.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
