High Court of Karnataka addressed Writ Petitions seeking Rs.10 lakhs compensation for the petitioner's husband's death allegedly caused by negligence of electricity department. Court noted death involved electrocution during hay collection.
Respondents to consider prior representation on negligence and file report/award compensation within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
Dated this the 28th day of January, 2015
Before
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH
Writ Petitions 10407 - 409 / 2013 (GM KEB)
Between
(By Sri Pavan Chandra Shetty, Adv.)
And
Turuvekere Division, Turuvekere Tq Tumkur District Respondents
(By Sri V Y Kumar, Adv.)
Writ Petitions are filed under Art.226/227 of the Constitution praying to direct respondents to pay the petitioners a sum of Rs.10 lakhs as compensation for the death of late Prasanna Kumar due to negligence of the respondents.
The Petitions coming on for preliminary hearing this day, Court made the following:
ORDER
Petitioners have sought a mandamus directing respondents to pay
the petitioners a sum of Rs.10 lakhs for the death of one Prasanna Kumar whose death was due to negligence of the respondent.s
According to the petitioners who are the legal representatives of the deceased, Prasanna Kumar died on 4.4.2010 in the afternoon around 12.00 noon. Prasanna Kumar was said to be working in the agricultural field, collecting hay. A low lying electric wire incidentally came in contact with the hay bundle which was carried by the deceased due to which electrocution has taken place. It is alleged that due to improper maintenance of the respondents the incident has taken place, the deceased was immediately taken to Victoria Hospital where he was declared dead. A case in UDR 131/2010 was also registered and charge
3
sheet was filed. Meanwhile, one more complaint also came to be filed. The final report is Prasanna Kumar died due to electric shock. Contending that the death was due to negligence on the part of the respondent authority due to improper maintenance, despite representation given to the respondents no action has been initiated, accordingly, they are before this Court.
Counsel for the respondents submitted, there is alternate remedy available and petitions are not maintainable.
There is a report said to be submitted regarding negligence on the part of the respondent authority. If there are precedents to consider the case of the petitioners, it is for the respondent authority to consider the said representation and take a just decision in the matter in awarding compensation, within three months from the date of receipt of this order.
Petitions are disposed of.
SD/-
Judge
An
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking compensation for death due to negligence is maintainable.
Varalakshmi and others
Managing Director, BESCOM, and others
Huluvadi G Ramesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
