Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. And Ors vs Kalawati And Ors

The matter comes up on an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 135 days in filing the appeal.

Notice of such application has already been served upon the respondents. Hence, service is complete.

For the reasons mentioned in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the same is allowed. The delay in filing the appeal is, thus,

condoned.

With the consent of the parties, the matter has been heard finally.

The appellants-Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (for short’ JVVNL’) have preferred this misc. appeal claiming the following reliefs:

“i. the present appeal filed by the appellants may very kindly be accepted and allowed with cost throughout.

ii. the impugned judgment dated 04.12.2018 passed by learned District Judge, Hanumangarh in Civil Original Case No.26/2016 (CIS No.55/2016) may

kindly be quashed and set aside.

Iii. It may kindly be declared that in the present matter the appellants have no liability to pay any compensation to the claimants.

iv. any other appropriate relief(s), which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be

granted in favour of the appellants.

v. costs be awarded in favour of the appellant throughout.â€​

Mr. Mukul Singhvi, learned counsel appearing for appellants-JVVNL vehemently submits that the tractor was on the rail of the AG minor canal,

and Dinesh, the driver of the tractor got electrocuted from 11,000 KV electricity line, resulting into his death.

He further submits that there was complete negligence on the part of the deceased driver in taking the tanker upon the AG minor canal, and thus,

compensation, as awarded vide the impugned judgment, is not justified.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondentsplaintiffs however, submits that the height of 11,000 KV line ought to have been such that the any

minor aberration would not result into electrocution.

He further submits that 11,000 KV line itself is a very dangerous thing, and thus, the appellants ought to have taken proper care and caution of putting

such electricity line at a height, where, in any normal circumstance, a person may not suffer electrocution. He also submits that taking the tanker to

the canal for filling water was a regular feature, and it cannot be said to be such an extraordinary feature, which would reflect negligence on the part

of deceased-Dinesh.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case, this Court is of the opinion that 11,000 KV line(s) are such

dangerous infrastructure that they ought to be put at a proper height, where normally a person would not suffer electrocution. Further, a tractor going

to canal, cannot be said to be an so absurd proposition, which could justify any negligence on the part of a person getting electrocuted, while driving

the same.

Thus, this Court does not find any justified reason to make any interference in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. All the pending

applications stand disposed of.