- (1.) The defendants are in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby a sum of Rs.3,90,000.00 was awarded as damages on account of death of Jugraj Singh, at the hands of the appellants.
(2.) The plaintiffs have claimed compensation on the ground that on 6.7.1994 Sant Singh defendant no.1 armed with a fatti (piece of wood) Ajmer Singh defendant no.2 armed with balla (log of wood), pulled Jugraj towards the tubewell. Defendant no. 2 gave a balla blow on the lips of Jugraj Singh due to which Jugraj Singh fell down and then defendant no.1 gave two Fatti blows on the forehead of Jugraj Singh, which lead to death of Jugraj Singh. The said incident was witnessed by one Jagtar Singh, who appeared as a witness in the criminal prosecution against the defendant but before he could be examined in the Civil Court, he died on 25/12/1995.
(3.) His statement Exhibit PA was considered by the Civil Court along with other evidence to hold that the defendants are responsible for the unfortunate death of Jugraj Singh. Both the Courts have found that the defendants have not denied the incident but raised the plea of self defence, which they have failed to prove. It has been found that though the incident occurred on 6/7/1994 but the defendants got their medical examination conducted after two weeks on 20/7/1994. It has also been found that no independent evidence has been led by the defendants to prove that the deceased was having fire arms at the time of occurrence and he caused injuries to Sant Singh. It has been found by the learned first Appellate Court that if the defendants could send telegram on 6.7.1994 then why the medico legal examination of Sant Singh was not conducted just after the incident. It has also been found that there is no explanation as to why the pistol allegedly held by Jugraj Singh has not been recovered. All these facts led the Courts below to conclude that the plea of self defence, as set out by them, is not proved.;