Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 215 (GAU)

Chandulal Agarwalla v. Union of India (UOI)

2003-05-19

P.G.AGARWAL

body2003
JUDGMENT P.G. Agarwal, J. 1. This application by Chandulal Agarwalla has been filed seeking compensation of Rs. 10.00 Lakhs for the death of his son Joyprakash Agarwalla in an accident that took place on 25.7.1998 at village Brahmajan under Gohpur. P.S. On the above date when the Telephone installed at the place of the deceased started ringing the deceased picked up the same and died of electrocution instantly. The detailed facts of the incidence has been stated by the Sr. Electrical Inspector, Govt. of Assam who conducted enquiry in this matter and submitted a report on 4.1.99. From the above report it appears- that on 25.7.98 at mid day three personnel of Department of Telecommunication were working on their telephone lines in proximity of 11 KV high tension over head lines of the Board where 11 KV spur line of Belijan was crossed near National High Way No. 52. The personnel of Department of Communication were trying to fit some sort of insulating pipe on telephone wires at the crossing point by way of sliding the insulating pipe over the wire at one end then pulling the same from the ground with the help of a rope. During the said process of work, the telephone wires swinged heavily and came into contact with the 11 KV ASEB line. This coming into contact of P and T lines at a voltage above their working voltage. This as a result immediately spread the voltage to other wires of P and T on the same support and thereby led to death burning of telephone sets, flouring of the ASEB barrel fuse conductors, snapping of telephone line etc. The Electrical Inspector in his report has stated that the Department of Telecommunication has violated the Rule 82A Indian Electricity Rules, 1956. 2. In this case, the Respondent State has also filed their affidavit in opposition and they have not disputed about the death of the deceased in the above incident. Copy of the FIR shows that the deceased Joyprakash Agarwalla was aged about 22 years had to face untimely death for no fault of him as there is no negligence on the part of the deceased. 3. The Electrical Inspector is the competent Authority under the Electricity Act and on whose report can be acted upon to give succour to the family of the deceased. 3. The Electrical Inspector is the competent Authority under the Electricity Act and on whose report can be acted upon to give succour to the family of the deceased. The Electrical Inspector in his report found that the employees of the Telecommunication Department has violated the Indian Electricity Rules. It is provided that the compensation be paid by the Union of India the employer of the Telecommunication Department. So far, the amount of compensation is concerned the learned Counsel for the Petitioner was fair enough to submit that the Court may award any compensation as it deem fit and proper keeping in mind that the principles laid down for determination of compensation under the Motor Vehicle Act. 4. Upon consideration of the age and income of the deceased at the relevant time which is around Rs. 60,000/- annually and considering the other aspect of the matter we provided that the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 shall pay the compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- to the Petitioner. The amount shall be paid within a period of 3 months from the date of this order, failing which the Respondent shall pay interest at the rate of 9 percent on the above amount from the date of order.