Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. One Krishnan Nair and Appu Nair was a member of the Piravom Panchayat. He left his house during the early hours on 13-12-1982 to have a dip in a nearby canal, without any premonition that he would be entrapped by the death warrant so imminently. A live wire, snapped out of the cup joint on an electric post, was lying on the road and Krishnan Nair accidentally came across with the live wire and he slumped down and breathed his last. Thus his life was snuffed in a trice. His aged mother, his widow and children initiated action against the Kerala State Electricity Board (for short the KSEB) for damages on account of his death, alleging that the KSEB was negligent in maintaining the electric line under their management on the route concerned. The trial court accepted the case and gave a decree for Rs. 75,0007-with interest and costs. The KSEB, aggrieved by the aforesaid decree has filed this appeal.

3. In the written statement, the KSEB admitted that Krishnan Nair died at the time and on the date alleged, but they denied that he was electrocuted. They also denied negligence on their part and claimed that the electric installations under their management were regularly and properly maintained, adopting all safety methods and precautionary measures. According to the KSEB, Krishnan Nair did not have any income at all and he was only "an unemployed politician". The amount of damages claimed is highly exorbitant and inflated, contended the KSEB.

5. Learned counsel for the KSEB contended that the court below went wrong in holding that the KSEB was negligent in maintaining the electric line in good repair and that the quantum of damages has been arbitrarily fixed without norms or principles.

6. We obtained the records from the court below and heard the counsel again at length on the points urged by him. On a consideration of the entire facts and circumstances of this case, in the light of the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the appellant, we do not consider this a fit case where notice to the respondents should be issued.

10. In this case, the plaintiffs discharged their burden by establishing that Krishnan Nair was electrocuted from a live wire which hanged down from an electric post on the roadside. Facts thus far established speak for themselves and it is for the KSEB to rebut the presumption with positive evidence to show that they have been maintaining the power supply system at this particular place under proper care and repair. But the KSEB utterly failed to rebut the presumption. D.W. 1, an Assistant Engineer of the KSEB, instead of rebutting the presumption, has candidly admitted that he has no direct knowledge about the occurrence and that he did not make an enquiry about it. On the other hand. Ext. X1. a report prepared by the Electrical Inspector shows that the accident occurred when "one of the L.T. conductors slipped from the pin insulator by breaking the binding wire". Ext. Xl report was made under Rule 44A of the Indian Electricity Rules and thus is a public document made by a public servant in the discharge of his statutory duty. The contents of Ext. XI would cut at the root of the defendant's case that there was no negligence at all on the part of the KSEB in keeping the power supply system under proper care.