Dismissed

Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. v. Mahendra

Rajasthan HC15 Mar 2021CSA/243/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil second appeal, the High Court of Rajasthan (Jodhpur) dismissed the appeal and upheld the lower courts' finding that the appellants' buffaloes died due to electrocution caused by negligence in maintaining electricity lines, awarding compensation to the respondent.

What did the court decide?

Second appeal dismissed; original decrees awarded compensation for death of buffaloes by electrocution affirmed.

Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Vs Mahendra — Specific Performance | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 243/2019

¶3

Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Through

¶4

1.) Managing Director, Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Jodhpur.

¶5

2.) Superintending Engineer, Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Churu (Raj.).

¶6

3.) Assistant Engineer (O&M), Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Sadulpur (Rajgarh), District – Churu (Raj.).

¶7

----Appellants

¶8

Versus

¶9

Mahendra S/o Shri Laduram, B/c Jat, R/o Chimanpura, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu (Raj.)

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shyam Vyas. Mr. Govind Suthar. For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.R. Jajra.

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

¶13

Order

¶14

15/03/2021

¶15

This second appeal is directed against judgment & decree dated 08.03.2018 passed by Senior Civil Judge, Rajgarh, District – Churu and judgment & decree dated 22.04.2019 passed by Additional District Judge No.1, Rajgarh, District – Churu, whereby the suit filed by the respondent for compensation has been decreed and the appeal filed by the appellants has been rejected, respectively.

¶16

The suit was filed for compensation by the respondentplaintiff, inter alia, with the submissions that his two buffaloes, which were aged about 8 years and 4 years, when he was taking them to the pond for watering on 18.06.2015 at about 9 AM, they

¶17

(2 of 4)

¶18

[CSA-243/2019]

¶19

came in contact with stay-wire of the electricity pole, as electric current was flowing in the said stay-wire, both the buffaloes, on coming in contact with the said wire, succumbed.

¶20

A report was lodged with the police on 19.06.2015 with the Police Station, Rajgarh, postmortem was conducted at the Government Veterinary Hospital on 19.06.2015, wherein the reason for death is indicated as electrocution. It was alleged that the accident occurred on account of negligence on part of the appellants-defendants in maintaining the electricity line. Compensation to the tune of Rs.1,40,000/- was claimed for the death of two buffaloes alongwith interest.

¶21

A written statement was filed denying the averments made therein. It was indicated that the Police Investigating Officer has prepared a false site map and false postmortem report has been got prepared. It was claimed that in June, 2015, there was widespread disease in animals at Village – Chimanpura, to which, the buffaloes had succumbed and they had not died due to electrocution.

¶22

It was claimed that the wires were not loose and that the electric current was not flowing in the stay-wire. It was prayed that the suit be dismissed.

¶23

Based on the averments of the parties, the trial court framed three issues. On behalf of the plaintiff, three witnesses including the doctor, who conducted the postmortem, were examined and on behalf of the defendants, two witnesses were examined.

¶24

After hearing the parties, the trial court came to the conclusion that the accident occurred on account of negligence on part of the defendants, wherein electricity current was flowing in the stay-wire, the buffaloes came in contact with the same and

¶25

(3 of 4)

¶26

[CSA-243/2019]

¶27

succumbed and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/-.

¶28

Feeling aggrieved, the appellants filed first appeal. The first appellate court after hearing the parties, reiterated the findings recorded by the trial court and dismissed the appeal.

¶29

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the trial court did not discuss the issues raised in a proper manner. It was indicated that the trial court simply reproduced the statements of the witnesses and jumped to the conclusion and, therefore, the judgment impugned deserved interference, however, the first appellate court failed to appreciate the said aspect.

¶30

Further submissions were made that the case set-up by the appellants was not examined and the plea raised by the plaintiff has been accepted in toto, which is not justified. It was prayed that the appeal be admitted on the substantial questions of law as suggested.

¶31

Learned counsel for the respondent supported the judgments impugned.

¶32

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

¶33

As noticed hereinbefore, the case of the plaintiff was specific that the buffaloes died due to electrocution. The defendants took the plea that the buffaloes did not died due to electrocution, but died on account of some disease and went on to make allegations that the site map prepared by the police as well as the postmortem report of the Govt. Hospital, were concocted.

¶34

On part of the plaintiff, besides the plaintiff himself, one Gulab Singh as PW-2 and Dr. Sumer Singh of Govt. Veterinary

¶35

(4 of 4)

¶36

[CSA-243/2019]

¶37

Hospital, Rajgarh as PW-3, who gave the postmortem report, were examined. All the three witnesses were cross-examined and the trial court, after analyzing the evidence available on record, categorically came to the conclusion that the buffaloes died on account of electrocution and the submissions made regarding the site map and the postmortem being concocted, had no basis.

¶38

Once it is found that the buffaloes died on account of the electrocution and the defendants had raised fantastic defense by going on to discredit the police as well as the Govt. Hospital Doctor in preparing of the site map and the postmortem report, based on principles of res ipsa loquitur, it was apparent that the accident occurred on account of negligence of the respondentsdefendants, wherein electric current was flowing in the stay-wire of the electricity pole.

¶39

In view thereof, the concurrent judgments of the two courts below based on finding of fact do not give rise to any substantial question of law.

¶40

Consequently, the appeal has no substance, the same is, therefore, dismissed.

¶41

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶42

26-PKS/-

Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. v. Mahendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. v. Mahendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narayanchand Vs Lal Chand

Lrs of Aasha Devi Vs M/S Rajendra Kumar Surendra Kumar

Chetan Kumar @ Chetan Prakash Vs Akhilesh Chandra Chhabra (a.C. Chhabra)

Onkarnath Vs Lrs of Gangaram

Roop Chand Vs Rajesh @ Kaliya and Anr.

Padma Ram and Anr. Vs Jamna and Ors.