VARGHESE Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Often one can see common crows, fruit bats and such unfortunate birds hanging electrocuted and lying unattended, on power lines. Should that be the fate of human beings, visited with the misfortune of being electrocuted on coming into contact with electrical energy either, through the lines, the posts or towers supplying the lines carrying electrical energy under the control of the licensee Can the licensee in control of supply management of an extra-hazardous business of supplying electricity, through uninsulated power lines, be permitted, to wriggle out of its strict liability to compensate the kith and kin of the electrocuted These are the questions that crop up for consideration in this appeal. Appellants are the parents of Sani Varghese (for short, "deceased") who died on 1.8.1990 at the age of 18, as a result of electrocution. According to them, on 25.7.1990, deceased sustained fatal burns when he came into contact with the tower of the 66 KV electric line near the ridge of a paddy field, while he was rushing to his house, when rain started unexpectedly. The boy, initially, admitted in the Medical College Hospital, Thrissur, was subsequently shifted to Little Flower Hospital, Angamaly, where he succumbed to the burns on 1.8.1990, while undergoing treatment. The appellants approached the court below claiming compensation of Rs. 1,65,000/- with interest.

(2.) The respondent, Kerala State Electricity Board, contended that the suit is barred by limitation and that the deceased sustained burns when he climbed on the tower, to release his kite that was entangled in the electric line, and therefore, negligence could not be attributed to it.

(3.) The court below held that the victim as well as the respondent were negligent and, accordingly, fixed the liability of the respondent at Rs. 21,500/-. After deducting Rs. 15,000/- paid by the respondent to the appellants as ex gratia, the court below decreed the suit for Rs. 6,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of suit. Dissatisfied with the meager amount decreed, the plaintiffs have come up in appeal.