P.K.LOHRA,J. - (1.) Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited (AVVNL) through its Officers has laid this first appeal under section 96 CPC to question the legality and propriety of judgment and decree dated 14th of October, 2017, passed by Addl. District Judge, Sagwara, District Doongarpur (for short, 'learned trial Court'). By the impugned judgment and decree, learned trial Court has partly decreed the suit filed by respondent for compensation under section 1A of the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 (for short, 'Act') and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,58,000 with interest thereon @ 6% per annum from 22.08.2013, the date of institution of the suit.
(2.) The bare necessary facts, for the purpose of this appeal, are that respondent-plaintiffs filed a suit (Civil Misc. Case No.10/2015 (old No.12/13) (Civil Case No.38) for compensation under the Act on 22.08.2013 claiming a sum of Rs. 20,53,000 before learned trial Court, inter-alia, on the ground that deceased Mr. Kishu Khat while irrigating his agricultural field came in contact with wire supporting the electric poles and as his leg got stuck with the wire he died. Alleging negligence and careless of the defendants it was stated in the claim that at the time of his death Kishu Khat was 30 years of age. Under different heads, the loss of income was claimed to be Rs. 15,00,000, Rs. 5,00,000 as compensation, Rs. 50,000 for love and affection and Rs. 3,000 for funeral expenses. Thus, the respondent-plaintiffs quantified the total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 20,53,000. The cause of accident, which resulted in death of Kishu Khat was attributed to the appellants precisely on the ground that they are expected to take safety measures to prevent any mishap including loss of human life. After service of summons, appellants contested the claim of respondent-plaintiffs and filed detailed reply to the claim refuting their negligence as alleged in the plaint and stated that the incident occurred due to negligence of deceased himself as he himself was careless. The appellants also denied their responsibility and prayed for dismissal of the suit filed against them.
(3.) The learned trial Court, on the basis of pleadings of rival parties, framed issues for determination. For substantiating their claim, respondent-plaintiffs examined two witnesses including first respondent wife of deceased AW1 Radha and AW2 Ashok Khat. In counter, appellants tendered evidence of NAW1 Vinod Kumar and NAW2 Nimesh Kumar. Both the sides also exhibited certain documents. After recording evidence of the parties, learned trial Court heard final arguments and by the impugned judgment and decree partly allowed the claim of the respondent plaintiffs.;