Dismissed

Barfi Devi v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Jul 2012LPA/443/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the appeal against the Single Judge's order dismissing a writ petition for death compensation as turned on delay and laches. The Court held no exceptional circumstances were proven to justify stepping in despite the 11-year delay, directing the appellant to approach the Civil Court instead.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed; the appellant was directed to approach the Civil Court for the compensation claim.

Barfi Devi Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Consumer Protection | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶2

LPA No.443 of 2012 (O & M) Date of Decision : July 23, 2012

Barfi Devi

..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of Haryana & others

¶7

..... RESPONDENT(S)

¶8

. . .

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH

¶10

. . .

¶11

PRESENT: - None.

¶12

Surya Kant, J (Oral)

¶13

C.M. No.1154 of 2012

¶14

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the

¶15

same is allowed.

¶16

Delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶17

LPA No.443 of 2012

¶18

This appeal is directed against the order dated 20.12.2011 whereby Civil Writ Petition No.23714 of 2011 preferred

¶19

by the appellant has been dismissed by learned Single Judge on the ground of delay and laches.

¶20

LPA No.443 of 2012 [2]

¶21

The appellant filed the above stated writ petition

¶22

seeking compensation of ` 5 lac on account of death of her husband who allegedly, died due to electrocution due to the negligence of the authorities of Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited.

¶23

The occurrence took place on 31.12.2000 as is apparent from the post-mortem report (Annexure P-1). The only other document on record is a petition moved under Section 22 of the Public Utility Services Act, 1987 (Annexure P-2) which was filed by appellant in the year 2011. The said petition was dismissed on 25.11.2011 with liberty to the appellant to approach the Civil Court or appropriate Forum, if she so desires. The appellant thereafter filed the above mentioned writ petition which has been dismissed by learned Single Judge observing that she cannot have a remedy for enforcement of claim for damages for death that happened in the year 2000 by a writ petition filed in the year 2011.

¶24

In our considered view, no exception can be taken to the reason assigned by the learned Single Judge. The writ jurisdiction in exceptional circumstances or in a case of extreme hardship where one's fundamental rights have been ravaged and such victim was unable to seek redressal for want of access to the judicial mechanism that a writ Court notwithstanding the delays, would always be justified to step in and uproot the cause of

¶25

LPA No.443 of 2012 [3]

¶26

injustice. However, such an extraordinary recourse is preceded by extraordinary and exceptional facts and circumstances pleaded and proved on record. Unfortunately, there is no material whatsoever on record to even suggest whether the appellant ever took up the cause of claim before 2011. In the absence of such material information, we find it difficult to form a view different from that of the leaned Single judge. The refusal to entertain the writ petition on the ground of delay and laches, however, would not work to the disadvantage of the appellant if she otherwise has a legally enforceable right to seek compensation. Suffice it would be to observe that the appellant may approach the Civil Court and establish that she has got a recurring cause of action and/or otherwise her claim is still maintainable. If such a remedy is invoked, the approached Forum shall expeditiously dispose of the claim in accordance with law.

¶27

Disposed of.

¶28

(Surya Kant)

¶29

(R.P. Nagrath) July 23, 2012 Judge avin

Barfi Devi v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Barfi Devi v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Gobind Enterprises Vs M/S Baba Gurmukh Singh Auto Ltd.

Mangat Mohan @ Manga Vs Renu and Ors.

Anil Kumar Garg Vs Naurang Dass and Ors.

M/S on Dot Couriers & Cargo Ltd. & Anr. Vs Permanent Lok Adalat & Ors.

Manjit Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Virender Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and Another