High Court allowed a writ petition under Art. 226 seeking compensation for electrocution death. Court held the Electricity Board liable for failing to monitor illegal power extensions, directing payment of Rs. 5 lakhs with interest.
Directed to pay Rs. 5 lakhs compensation with 7.5% interest from date of death 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 JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06-12-2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
WP NO.18389 OF 2011 AND WMP NO.5621 OF 2021
1.P.Dhanabakkiam (deceased)
(Petitioners 2 and 3 are substituted as LRs of the
made in WMP N.392 of 2020) .. Petitioners
vs.
Chennai – 600 002.
.. Respondents
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) towards compensation to the second and third petitioners for the death of the first petitioner's son, namely, P.Thiagarajan.
For Petitioners : Mr.K.Malaikannu
For Respondents : Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh, Standing Counsel for TANGEDCO.
O R D E R
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the respondents to pay compensation of Rs.25 lakhs on account of death of the brother of the second and third petitioners.
2. The first petitioner Tmt.P.Dhanabakkiam, who is the mother of the deceased, died during the pendency of the present writ petition and the second and third petitioners, who are the sisters of the deceased, are impleaded.
3. On 27.07.2009, the brother of the second and third petitioners Mr.P.Thiyagarajan, aged about 27 years, went to Koyambedu mofussil Bus Terminus on his way to Andhra Pradesh by bus in connection with his Textile business. In Koyambedu Chennai Mofussil Bus Terminus in front of Ramakrishna Weigh Bride, there was a barbed iron fencing and the iron fencing were lying on the ground. A tube light was tied in the trunk of the tree, which was standing in front of Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge. The tube light was tied along with the tree by one end of the iron fencing wire which had fallen down and the electric power supply was given to the tune light from the Office of the Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge through overhead wire.
4. On 27.07.2009, at about 11.00 P.M., there was rain and the electric power had inducted in the iron fencing wire by which the tube light was tied along with the trunk of the tree and the electric power was inducted in the remaining part of the iron fencing wire lying on the ground. When the brother of the second and third petitioners was walking there in front of Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge to attend his natural call near the said tree, he stepped on the live iron fencing wire without knowing that electric power and inducted in the lying fencing wire, which resulted in electrocution of the brother of the second and third petitioners and subsequently, the brother of the second and third petitioners died.
5. In the counter, the respondents have stated that Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge is responsible for the accident, as the accident occurred in the place of Ramakrishna Weight Bridge and therefore, the Electricity Board is not liable to pay compensation.
6. This Court is of the considered opinion that Ramakrishna Weigh Bride committed an illegality in fixing the tube light near by the Main Road by extending the Electricity Service Connection. It is the duty of the Electricity Board Authorities to monitor such illegality or irregular usage of electricity power supply by the consumers at Koyambedu Bus Terminus Power Supply, wherein large number of travellers are walking on the road. Therefore, the Electricity Board Authorities are expected to be more cautious and any such illegal extension of electricity wire or fixing of electrical equipments must be periodically monitored and actions must be taken in order to prevent such accidents of electrocutions.
7. Though the accident occurred, while the deceased was walking on the road nearby Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge, the electrocution occurred on account of the deceased, fell on the wire of the tube light tied along with the tree nearby Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge. This being the factum, the Electricity Board Authorities cannot shift their responsibility of monitoring the illegal usage of electricity power in public places or extending the electricity power supply by fixing the electrical equipments on the road or nearby the road, which is impermissible as per the Rules and Regulations of the Electricity Act.
8. This apart, the deceased was walking to reach the Bus Stand and he had no occasion to enter into Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge. Thus the contention of the respondents that the Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge is responsible for the incident, cannot be accepted, as the petitioner was waking towards the Bus Stand for the purpose of getting into the bus to proceed to Andhra Pradesh. This apart, the death of electrocution is not denied. Thus, further examination of evidence is not required.
9. In view of the fact that the death occurred due to electrocution to the brother of the second and third petitioners, the second and third petitioners are entitled for compensation. Accordingly, the Electricity Board Authorities are directed to pay a sum of Rs.5 lakhs along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of death of the deceased i.e., on 27.07.2009 till the date of realisation. The respondents are directed to settle the compensation along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However in case, the Electricity Board Authorities found that the Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge has committed the illegality regarding the usage of electricity power supply, which resulted in death
of the brother of the second and third petitioners, the Electricity Board Authorities are bound to initiate all appropriate actions, including recovery of compensation from the said Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge by providing an opportunity of hearing.
10. With the abovesaid directions, the writ petition stands allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Svn
To
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, N.P.K.R.R.Maligai, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
+1cc to Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh , Advocate, S.R.No.64441 +1cc to Mr.K.Malaikannu, Advocate, S.R.No.64255
WP 18389 of 2011
AD(CO) PM/16/12/2021
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent is liable to pay compensation for the death of the petitioner who died due to electrocution caused by illegal extension of electric wire.
Whether the contention of the respondent that the accident was solely the responsibility of Ramakrishna Weigh Bridge is sustainable.
Whether the respondent is bound to initiate recovery from the illegality committing party if found responsible.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
P.Dhanabakkiam (deceased), M.Kamatchi, P.Dhanalakshmi
The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
