Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 761 (MP)

M. P. S. E. B v. JASBEER SINGH

2003-06-24

BHAWANI SINGH, SHANTANU KEMKAR

body2003
BHAWANI SINGH, C. J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by District Judge, Narsimhapur, dated January 6, 2003, in C. S. No. 8-B/ 1995. ( 2 ) RESPONDENT is engaged in transport business. Truck No. CPJ 4122 is owned by him. On 3-6-1992, the truck had been taken by Bhagatsingh, agent of Harbhajan Singh lamba, for carriage of Tendu leaves from khamaria to Narsimhapur. While the truck was going from Richhai to Narsimhapur, loaded with Tendu leave bags, it caught fire due to spark from electric supply line of the appellants. As a result, except for 6 bags of tendu leaves, remaining bags were burnt. The truck was also burnt in the fire. Therefore, plaintiff lodged claim for damages in the trial Court on the ground that the fire accident took place due to the negligence of the appellants in not maintaining electric line properly which was hanging 13 above the road. Claim for Rs. 1,09,000. 00 has been raised. ( 3 ) APPELLANTS defendants denied the claim. It is stated that electric line is hanging in accordance with the norms, 19' - 20' above the ground, it was not hanging as alleged and trucks moved before and after the accident. The truck carried bags of Tendu leaves much above the normal height without taking precautionary measures. The accident could also have happened due to the negligence of the labourers sitting on the bags of Tendu leaves, smoking Bidis, and not because of the electric line. ( 4 ) ACCORDINGLY, trial Court framed as many as 6 issues in the case. After recording evidence, it held that the accident took place on 3-6-1992 when Truck No. CPJ 4122, going from Richhai, loaded with bags of Tendu leaves, carried by Bhagwansingh to Narsimhapur, caught fire due to sparks from the electric wires, resulting in the burning of the truck with 148 bags of Tendu leaves. The trial Court also held that the accident took place due to the negligence of the appellants in not maintaining the electric line in accordance with the norms. Consequently, damages of Rs. 1,05,715. 00 have been awarded as under :the above amount is to carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum. However, claim of Rs. 2,000. 00 for special damages has been rejected. Consequently, damages of Rs. 1,05,715. 00 have been awarded as under :the above amount is to carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum. However, claim of Rs. 2,000. 00 for special damages has been rejected. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree of the trial court, this appeal has been filed by the appellants, assailing the same. ( 5 ) HEARD Shri Vinod Kumar Mishra for appellants and Shri Kumaresh Pathak for the respondent. Record of the case has also been examined, particularly the documents. ( 6 ) IT is submitted by Shri Mishra that judgment and decree of the trial Court are liable to be set aside as they are not based on facts and appraisal of evidence in the case. Precisely, the submission is that evidence of the appellants, particularly statement of Shri B. S. Patel, Assistant Engineer (D. W. 1), clearly demonstrates that the accident did not take place due to the negligence of the appellants in maintaining the electricity line. Other witnesses do not speak about any kind of negligence on the part of the appellants in maintaining the electricity line. The accident seems to have taken place due to the negligence of the respondent's labourers. ( 7 ) CAREFUL reading of the evidence and appreciation thereof by the trial Court demonstrates that respondent has been able to establish negligence on the part of the appellants. There is no dispute about taking place of the accident; there is no dispute about the truck being burnt; there is no dispute about burning of bags of Tendu leaves; the only dispute is how it happened. The most important witness in this case is Shri h. L. Tembhre (P. W. 12 ). He is Dy. Range officer. He has specifically stated that after receiving information about the accident, he went to the spot where he saw destruction of Tendu leave bags and salvaging of 6 bags only. He also saw burning of the truck. People assembled there told him that due to wind, the electricity wires came in contact resulting in sparks resulting in the fire, to the truck and Tendu leave bags. When he reached the spot, he saw that electricity wires were loose. Other evidence of the plaintiff is on the same line. He also saw burning of the truck. People assembled there told him that due to wind, the electricity wires came in contact resulting in sparks resulting in the fire, to the truck and Tendu leave bags. When he reached the spot, he saw that electricity wires were loose. Other evidence of the plaintiff is on the same line. With this kind of evidence, it is difficult to accept the version of Shri B. S. Patel, Assistant Engineer, (D. W. 1 ). First of all, he would not like to accept negligence on the part of the appellants, otherwise, he would be liable for action for not keeping and supervising the electricity line properly. His statement that the labourers lifted the wires with a wood is contradictory to the later statement that the electricity wires had separators to avoid contact. Had they been separated as alleged, the wires could not have joined. There is Panchnama (Ex. P-l) on record. This Panchnama has been prepared by the persons who reached the spot after the accident and not by the respondent. The Panchnama also corroborates the version of the respondent. ( 8 ) NEXT it is contended that the dan ages awarded are on the higher side. We do not think so. Looking to the nature of loss to the truck, this extent of award is not much, rather it is reasonable, spent on the repairs of the truck. ( 9 ) THEREFORE, we do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed. Parties to bear their own costs. Appeal dismissed. .