- (1.) The petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India and have prayed for grant of compensation on account of the death of one Joginder Singh due to electrocution. It has been alleged by them that the electrocution took place solely on account of the negligence of the respondents who did not take care to protect the wire which was providing electricity to the shed where the deceased was working as Mechanic and as a consequence thereof, the electrocution took place and thus, it has been prayed that the petitioners be granted compensation.
(2.) Notice of motion was issued to the respondents and as an interim measure, it was directed that the respondents shall give a compensation of Rs.1 lac to the petitioners.
(3.) Reply to the petition has been filed in which the respondents have denied their liability to pay the compensation and have also denied that there was any negligence on their part. It has been averred in para-2 of the preliminary objections that the shed where the workshop had been set up, was unauthorised. The shed was supported by GI Pipes. During the enquiry conducted by the S.D.O. Operations, it was found that a 4/C cable was crossing the workshop of Joginder Singh and GI iron had been tied with this service cable for supporting a hoarding installed in front of the workshop. Due to friction caused by the hoarding on account of wind pressure, this GI iron which was supporting the hoarding and tied to the service cable, damaged the 4/C cable exposing it to direct contact with the said GI iron, as a result of which it started carrying the electricity current and when the deceased sprayed water on the shed, he got electrocuted through the support tied with the GI Pipe.;