- (1.) C M No. 4745-C of 2015 There is delay of 50 days in filing of the appeal. Heard. In view of the reasons mentioned in the application, the application stands allowed and the delay of 50 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 23.08.2014 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Karnal, vide which the appeal filed by the appellants-plaintiffs against the judgment and decree dated 25.01.2012, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Karnal has been dismissed.
(2.) The appellants-plaintiffs has filed a suit for recovery of un- liquidated damages along with interest at the rate of 18 % per annum, till realization of the decretal amount on the grounds inter alia that there is a Power House of 33 KV in village Rahra. The transformer which was installed in the field of one Rampal son of Surjit, resident of village Rahra, District Karnal was burnt. Said Rampal wanted to get the said transformer removed from his fields by requesting the defendants. On 13.12.2007, at about 10.00 A.M, said Rampal and deceased Chander Bhan went to the Power House, Rahra. Rampal requested Suraj BhanLineman to remove the aforesaid transformer. Kala son of Sanmukh was also present in the Power House at that time. Suraj Bhan-Lineman made an entry in the Register for his departure to the spot for the removal of the transformer. The jumper of the transformer of Chander Bhan-deceased was also not working. Suraj Bhan-Lineman informed that he will get the same repaired by switching off the electric supply of village Rahra. The transformer was removed from the fields of Rampal. Thereafter, Suraj Bhan-Lineman along with deceased-Chander Bhan reached at the fields of Kala and tried to repair the transformer. Suraj Bhan-Lineman requested Chander Bhan to given him the spanner. When Chander Bhan tried to given him the spanner, then both Chander Bhan and Suraj Bhan-Lineman were electrocuted. Due to electrocution Chander Bhan fell down and sustained injuries. Suraj Bhan also received some injuries. Chander Bhan was taken to CHC, Assandh. But, he succumbed to the injuries on the way. It is pleaded that the aforesaid incident has taken place due to negligence of defendant no. 3. A criminal case was also registered against respondent no.3. Plaintiffs no. 1 and 2 are the parents. Plaintiff no. 3 is the widow and plaintiffs no. 4 to 6 are the children of deceased-Chander Bhan. He was having the land measuring 19 Kanals and was also doing the dairy farming and earning Rs. 20,000/- per month. The plaintiffs have lost their source of livelihood. Defendant no. 3 was working under the control and supervision of defendants no. 1 and 2. Hence the suit.
(3.) The defendants/respondents contested the suit inter alia on the ground that a false criminal case has been got registered against respondent no. 3-Subhash by Kala, who is a close relative of the deceased. No complaint was moved by the deceased to the defendants with respect to any defect in his transformer. Infact, he was in the process of doing the theft of electricity energy when the occurrence took place. So, no fault can be attributed to the defendants. The plaintiffs have cooked up a false and baseless story just to extort money from the defendants. Suraj Bhan-Lineman has not received any injury in the occurrence. With these pleas, defendants pleaded for dismissal of the suit.;