Partly allowed

Henjegowda v. Superintendent Engineer

Karnataka HC6 Dec 2023RFA/1728/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enhanced compensation awarded to the husband and children of a deceased woman in an electrocution case. Applying principles from motor accident judgments, the court calculated a higher total compensation of Rs. 15,48,120/-, granting an additional Rs. 2,05,115/- to the appellants for the delayed period.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,98,115/- granted with 6% interest from suit date; delayed interest denied.

Henjegowda Vs Superintendent Engineer — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:44113 RFA No. 1728 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1728 OF 2021(RES)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

HENJEGOWDA S/O. LATE KARESIDAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

¶7

G.H. YASHVANTHKUMAR S/O. HENJEGOWDA AGED 22 YEARS

¶8

G.H.DHANRAJ S/O. HENJEGOWDA AGED 18 YEARS

¶9

Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

ALL ARE RESIDING AT BADAMARANAHALLI VILLAGE HULIKUNTE HOBALI SIRA TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 216.

¶11

(BY SRI GIRISH B. BALADARE, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER KARYA & PALANA CIRCLE BENGALURU POWER SUPPLY BOARD LTD., OLD KOTHITHOP ROAD TUMAKURU TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 216.

¶14

…APPELLANTS

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI H.V. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE)

¶17

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF THE CPC., PRAYING TO MODIFY THE

¶18

¶19

NC: 2023:KHC:44113 RFA No. 1728 of 2021

¶20

JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.10.2018 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., AT TUMAKURU IN O.S.NO.377/2017 AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶21

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

This appeal arises out of the impugned judgment and decree dated 05.10.2018 passed in O.S.No.377/2017 by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC., Tumakuru, whereby the said suit filed seeking compensation against the respondent/defendant by the appellants/plaintiffs, husband and children of the deceased Kamalamma on account of electrocution, was partly decreed by the trial court. By the impugned judgment and decree, the trial court declared that the plaintiffs were entitled to a sum of Rs.10,50,005/together with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of suit till payment from the respondent/defendant Authority.

¶24

This appeal is preferred by the appellants/plaintiffs seeking enhancement of the compensation aggrieved by the impugned judgment and decree.

¶25

Heard.

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:44113 RFA No. 1728 of 2021

¶27

Perusal of the material on record will indicate that

¶28

appellants/plaintiffs are the husband and children of the deceased Kamalamma, who died due to electrocution on 27.09.2014 at 12.30 p.m., when she was cutting the ragi crops in her land bearing Sy.No.102 situated at Gonihalli Village, the electric wire supplied from the transfer put up in her land to I.P. set of bore well, fell down on the floor, as the skin of the wire was worn out and the said Kamalamma without observing the same touched it and died due to the actionable negligence of the respondent/defendant.

¶29

The respondent/defendant having contested the suit, the appellants/plaintiffs examined Plaintiff No.1 as P.W.1 and Exs.P.1 to P.8 were marked. An Official of BESCOM was examined as D.W.1 on behalf of the respondent/defendant.

¶30

After hearing the parties, the trial court came to the conclusion that the demise of Kamalamma was on account of negligence on the part of defendant (BESCOM) and consequently, answered Issue Nos.1 to 4 in favour of the appellants/plaintiffs. In so far as quantum of damages are concerned, the trial court awarded a sum of Rs.10,50,005/in favour of the

¶31

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:44113 RFA No. 1728 of 2021

¶32

appellants/plaintiffs together with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date

¶33

of suit till payment from the respondent/defendant Authority.

¶34

Upon re-appreciation, re-evaluation and

¶35

re-consideration of entire material on record, I am of the considered opinion that the compensation awarded by the trial court deserves to be re-worked and enhanced by taking into account the notional income of the deceased Kamalamma and bearing in mind the principles related to payment of compensation in motor vehicle accident cases as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in NATIONAL

¶36

INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs PRANAY SETHI AND

¶37

OTHERS reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 ; SARLA VERMA vs DELHI TRANSPORT COPORATION reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 and MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs NANU RAM ALIAS CHUHRU RAM AND OTHERS reported in (2018 ACJ 2782 (SC)) . The said principle directing payment of compensation in electrocution related death cases has been followed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of

¶38

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) AND ANOTHER vs SMT D.V. BHAGYA AND ANOTHER in RFA No.493/2019 - DD 17.02.2020 .

¶39

¶40

NC: 2023:KHC:44113 RFA No. 1728 of 2021

¶41

8. Under these circumstances, the compensation payable

¶42

in favour of the appellants/plaintiffs is to be worked as under:

¶43

The trial court has awarded
compensation :	10,50,005/-
The appellants claim the compensation as under as per
Karnataka Legal Services Committee the income to be taken the accident year 2014 :	8,500/-
40% future prospectus to be added total income :	3,400/-
Total income :	11,900/-
1/3 income to be deducted towards personal expenses. :	-3,966/-
Annual Income comes to
7,934x12x15 :	14,28,120/-
Funeral expenses :	15,000/-
Towards Estate :	15,000/-
Filial Consortium:3x30,000/- :	90,000/-
Total : : -	15,48,120/- -----------------
Compensation awarded by trial court :	10,50,005/-
Balance amount :	4,98,115/-
Amount already paid to appellants :	2,93,000/-
Enhanced amount entitled
by appellants :	2,05,115/-

¶44

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:44113 RFA No. 1728 of 2021

¶45

The appellants entitle for total compensation Rs.15,48,120/as against Rs.10,50,005/and enhanced compensation of Rs.4,98,115/Rs.2,93,000/- and balance amount Rs.2,05.115/- with 6% interest from the date of petition/suit till realization or deposit.

¶46

The appellants are not entitled for the interest during the delayed period."

¶47

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and decree dated 05.10.2018 passed in O.S.No.377/2017 by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru, is modified. Appellants/plaintiffs are entitled to additional enhanced compensation of Rs.4,98,115/- payable by the respondent/defendant to the appellants/plaintiffs together with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of suit till payment. The appellants/plaintiffs would not be entitled to interest for the delayed period in the appeal.

¶48

Registry to draw decree accordingly.

¶49

Sd/JUDGE

¶50

hkh.

Henjegowda v. Superintendent Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Henjegowda v. Superintendent Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Basavanagudi Vs Vasudeva Rao

M/S Satchmo Holdings Limited Vs M/S Pasolite Electricals Pvt. Ltd.

Asha Vs the Chief Secretary

Smt Susheelamma Vs the Commissioner

Rangadasappa Vs Superintendent Engineer

Pushpa Vs Superintendent Engineer