J V V N L Thr Chairman And Ors vs Shashi And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 6200 Raj/2

[2023:RJ-JP:30153]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

                     S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 587/2016

1.       Jaipur      Vidyut       Vitran     Nigam         Limited,    Through    Its
         Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, Jaipur Vidyut Vitra,
         Jaipur Raj.
2.       Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Through Its Executive
         Engineer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limi, Dhaulpur Raj.
3.       Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Through Its Assistant
         Engineer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limi, Baseri, District
         Dhaulpur Raj.
                                                                       ----Appellants
                                        Versus
1.       Shashi W/o Late Brij Mohan Singh, R/o Chhahar, Bai-Paas
         Road, Baseri, District Dhaulpur Raj.
2.       Neha Kumar D/o Late Brij Mohan Singh, Minor Through
         Her Natural Guardian Mother Sha, R/o Chhahar, Bai-Paas
         Road, Baseri, District Dhaulpur Raj.
3.       Rajat Singh @ Raj Kumar S/o Late Brij Mohan Singh
         Minor Through His Natural Guardian Mother Shashi, R/o
         Chhahar, Bai-Paas Road, Baseri, District Dhaulpur Raj.
4.       Sumit Singh S/o Late Brij Mohan Singh,Minor Through His
         Natural Guardian Mother Sh, R/o Chhahar, Bai-Paas Road,
         Baseri, District Dhaulpur Raj.
5.       Parvati W/o Late Jagdish, R/o Chhahar, Bai-Paas Road,
         Baseri, District Dhaulpur Raj.
                                                                     ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Ms. Neetu Bhansali, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dheeraj Singhal, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Judgment

DATE OF JUDGMENT 19/10/2023

Instant appeal has been filed by the appellants-defendants

(for short 'the defendants') against the judgment and decree

[2023:RJ-JP:30153] (2 of 3) [CFA-587/2016]

dated 06.07.2016 passed by the learned Additional District Judge,

Bari in Civil Suit No.65/2014 titled as Shashi & Ors. Vs. JVVNL &

Ors., whereby the suit filed by the respondents-plaintiffs (for short

'the plaintiffs') has been decreed and compensation of Rs.10 lacs

alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the

suit has been awarded.

Learned counsel for the defendants submits that the trial

court wrongly decreed the suit filed by the plaintiffs. Finding of the

trial court is perverse and not according to the evidence led by the

parties. Learned counsel for the defendants also submits that

albeit deceased died due to electric shock but on account of his

own negligence, so, defendants are not liable to pay compensation

to the plaintiffs. Defendants had adduced evidence to prove

negligence of the plaintiffs but trial court had not appreciated the

evidence led by the defendants in right perspective and had not

given any cogent reason for discarding the evidence led by the

defendants. Learned counsel for the defendants also submits that

there is evidence that at the time of incident a wet bamboo stick

was hanging with 11 KV line, which is sufficient enough to show

that deceased was trying to change the phase, so, he was

electrocuted. Learned counsel for the defendants also submits that

the trial court wrongly awarded Rs.10 lacs as a compensation

without assigning any cogent reason. So, appeal filed by the

defendants be allowed and the judgment & decree of the trial

court be set aside.

Learned counsel for the plaintiffs has opposed the arguments

advanced by learned counsel for the defendants and submitted

that trial court while decreeing the suit filed by the plaintiffs

[2023:RJ-JP:30153] (3 of 3) [CFA-587/2016]

clearly mentioned that the defendants failed to adduce any cogent

evidence that as to when repairing work of the lines was done in a

year. He further submitted that electric pole was not insulated. So,

the trial court rightly decreed the suit filed by the plaintiffs. So,

appeal be dismissed.

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the defendants as well as learned counsel for the

plaintiffs.

While decreeing the suit, the trial court clearly mentioned

that evidence adduced by the defendants was not supported by

any documentary evidence as to when repairing work of the lines

was done in a year and also not mentioned that any insulator was

fitted on the electric pole. So, it is a negligence on the part of the

defendants. The wet bamboo stick was also not recovered by the

defendants. So, in my considered opinion, the trial court rightly

decreed the suit filed by the plaintiffs. So, present appeal being

devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed

accordingly.

Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Jatin /242

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)