Rajasthan High Court
Reetha And Others vs J V V N L And Others on 16 October, 2023
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 168/2014
1. Reetha W/o Late Shri Rajveer, R/o Baghela, Gram
Kanchanpura, P.s. Rajakheda, Distt. Dholpur
2. Vandana Minor D/o Late Shri Rajveer And Sarpasti Mata
Reetha, R/o Baghela, Gram Kanchanpura, P.s. Rajakheda,
Distt. Dholpur
3. Kailawati W/o Shri Natthi Lal, R/o Baghela, Gram
Kanchanpura, P.s. Rajakheda, Distt. Dholpur
---Plaintiffs-Appellants
Versus
1. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Through General
Manager, Jaipur Rajasthan
2. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Through Executive
Engineer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Rajakheda,
Dholpur Rajasthan
3. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Through Assistant
Engineer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Rajakheda,
Dholpur Rajasthan
---Defendants-Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. R. P. Garg, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Kumar Gupta, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
Date Of Judgment 16/10/2023
The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants-plaintiffs
(for short 'the plaintiffs') against the judgment and decree dated
30.09.2013 passed by the District Judge, Dholpur in Civil Suit
No.46/2009 titled as Reetha & Ors. Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam
Limited & Ors., whereby the suit filed by the plaintiffs under
Section 3 of the Fatal Accident Act has been dismissed.
(2 of 3) [CFA-168/2014]
Learned counsel for the plaintiffs submits that the trial court
has wrongly dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiffs. Learned
counsel for the plaintiffs further submits that the trial court had
not appreciated the evidence led by the plaintiffs. Learned counsel
for the plaintiffs also submits that Rajveer died due to
electrocution and there was negligence on the part of the
defendants-respondents (for short 'the defendants'). He further
submits that naked fuse wires and earthing wires were lying on
the earth and due to touching of both the wires, current of
earthing wire flew on the linhay of the agricultural field as a result
of which Rajeev Burnt and subsequently died at the spot. Learned
counsel for the plaintiffs also submits that the plaintiffs lodged an
FIR against the defendants but the Investigating Officer wrongly
submitted the final report. So, the order of the trial court be set-
aside.
Learned counsel for the defendants has opposed the
arguments advanced by learned counsel for the plaintiffs and
submitted that the trial court has rightly appreciated the evidence
led by the parties. Rajveer died from electric current due to his
own negligence. The present FIR was lodged after a delay of 3
months through the court to get compensation amount. Learned
counsel for the defendants also submits that after investigation,
Investigating Officer in his report clearly mentioned that Rajveer
was trying to take the illegal electricity connection by laying down
wire on electric line due to which he sustained electric current and
died on the spot. So, the present appeal filed by the plaintiffs be
dismissed.
(3 of 3) [CFA-168/2014]
I have considered the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the plaintiffs as well as learned counsel for the
defendants.
It is an admitted position that the deceased-Rajveer died due
to electric current but evidence led by the plaintiffs did not prove
the negligency on the part of the defendants. The FIR was lodged
after a delay of 3 months and Investigating Officer in his report
clearly mentioned that Rajveer was trying to take illegal electricity
connection by laying down wire on electric lines and thus, due to
his own negligence he died. So, in my considered opinion, the trial
court has rightly dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiffs. So, the
present appeal being devoid of merits, is liable to be dismissed,
which stands dismissed accordingly.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Gourav/208
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
