Madras High Court
The Chairman And Managing Director vs / on 3 January, 2024
Author: G.Jayachandran
Bench: G.Jayachandran
W.A.(MD)No.887 of 2016
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 03.01.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
W.A.(MD)No.887 of 2016
1.The Chairman and Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Ltd.,
NPKKR Maaligai, 144, Anna Salai,
Chennai-600 002.
2.The Superintending Engineer,
The Executive Engineer Distribution / TANGEDCO,
Thiruppathur Taluk, Sivagangai District.
3.The Executive Engineer,
Distribution / TANGEDCO,
Thiruppathur Taluk,
Sivagangai District. ...Appellants
/Vs./
L.Malathi ...Respondent
PRAYER:- Writ Appeal - filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent Act, to
set aside the order dated 30.04.2013 made in W.P.(MD)No.2355 of 2013
on the file of this Court.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.887 of 2016
For Appellants : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan
For Respondent : Mr.M.Kaliraj
JUDGMENT
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
AND
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
This writ appeal is preferred by TANGEDCO being aggrieved
by the order passed by the learned Single Judge awarding compensation
to the respondent herein for the electrocution death of her husband.
2. The allegation by the respondent is that due to ill
maintenance of the service line, the husband of the respondent herein got
electrocuted, while saving a goat caught inbetween the electric pole.
Snapping of live wire is admitted by TANGEDCO and therefore, the
learned Judge thought fit that for the negligence on the part of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TANGEDCO, they are liable to pay compensation. Accordingly,
compensation of Rs.4,25,000/- and the litigation costs of Rs.25,000/-
along with interest was ordered. Being aggrieved, this writ appeal has
been filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants /
TANGEDCO vehemently argued that the said order of the learned Single
Judge is contrary to the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in SDO, Grid Corporation of Orissa Ltd., and Others vs. Timudu Oram
reported in 2005 (6) SCC 156.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted
that pursuant to the order passed by the learned Single Judge,
TANGEDCO has deposited the money and the same has been withdrawn
by the respondent herein.
5. Since it is an extraordinary and exceptional case, the High
Court has exercised its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
India and awarded compensation. The same need not be interfered with
and the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited by the learned
counsel for the appellants will not apply to the facts of this case.
6. Having considered the rival submissions and perusal of the
records, this Court finds that the respondent herein, who has lost her
husband due to electrocution, had approached this Court invoking article
226 of the Constitution of India. This Court, having found that the
allegation was due to ill maintenance of the electric line, has awarded the
compensation of Rs.4,25,000/- and the litigation costs of Rs.25,000/-.
The said order passed on 30.04.2013 has been complied with by
TANGEDCO and had preferred this appeal to set right the erroneous
order pointing out the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
SDO, Grid Corporation of Orissa Ltd., supra.
7. This Court though agreed with the submissions made by the
learned counsel appearing for the appellants, having reported that the
money has been withdrawn by the widow of the deceased victim, this
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of the learned Single
Judge. Accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.
[G.J.J.,] & [C.K.J.,]
03.01.2024
NCC :Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes
sm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
AND
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
sm
Judgment made in
Dated:
03.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
