Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs Ram Kumar S/o Dhanpat

This second appeal has been filed by the appellant-

Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. against the judgment and

decree dated 31.5.2016 passed by learned Additional District

Judge, Rajgarh, District Churu whereby the appeal filed by the

respondent-plaintiff was allowed and suit was decreed and

judgment and decree dated 12.2.2016 passed by the Civil Judge,

Rajgarh was set aside and the appellant was directed to pay

compensation of Rs.80,000/-.

Brief facts of the case are that the respondent-plaintiff

filed a suit before the Civil Judge, Rajgarh wherein it is stated that

his buffalo died due to stuck to electricity wire of appellant-Nigam

for which a compensation of Rs.80,000/- was demanded.

The appellant-Nigam filed written statement wherein

the appellant-defendant stated that no liability accrues to Nigam

for payment and the buffalo died due to negligence of respondent-

plaintiff.

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned

trial court framed as many as six issues and after evidence of both

the parties, the Civil Judge, Rajgarh, District Churu dismissed the

suit of the respondent-plaintiff on 12.2.2016.

Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated

12.2.2016, the respondent-plaintiff preferred first appeal before

the Additional District Judge, Rajgarh, District Churu which was

allowed and the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff was decreed

vide judgment and decree dated 31.5.2016.

Being aggrieved with the said judgment and decree

passed by learned first appellate court dated 31.5.2016, the

appellant-Nigam has preferred the present second appeal before

this Court.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that

the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned first

appellate court is contrary to law and facts and is liable to be

quashed and set aside. The learned trial court appreciated the

evidence correctly and decided the issues while holding that the

negligence was not of appellant but was of respondent-plaintiff

and the first appellate court has erred in allowing the suit and the

first appeal, therefore, the judgment and decree passed by

learned first appellate court is liable to be quashed and set aside

and the judgment of the trial court may be upheld.

On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondent-

plaintiff has supported the impugned judgment passed by learned

first appellant court and submitted that the learned first appellate

court has rightly allowed the first appeal and decreed the suit and

no error has been committed by the learned first appellate court in

passing the impugned judgment dated 31.5.2016 and prayed that

the instant second appeal may kindly be dismissed.

The substantial question of law which arises in the

present appeal is as under:-

Whether the judgment passed by the appellate

court is based on misreading of oral or

documentary evidence or the same has been

passed by overlooking the material available on

record and is contrary to the provisions of law?

Upon perusal of record, it is admitted fact that buffalo

contacted with an electric stay wire in which electricity was

running as a result of which the buffalo died. Upon perusal of

evidence, it is clear that the respondent-plaintiff succeeded to

prove that appellant-defendant never kept maintenance of

transformer, stay wire and pole etc. Despite information, the

appellant-defendants were always negligent to maintain the lying

wire and transformer. The appellant-defendants failed to produce

any evidence which shows that they were aware and maintained

the pole, lying wire, stay wire and transformer etc. The

defendant-witness DW-2 Mahaveer who is Technical Helper of

appellant-Vidhyut Vitran Nigam in his cross-examination had

categorically admitted that "VERNACULAR MATTER OMITTED"

In these circumstances, it is proved that buffalo died

due to electric shock from a stay wire and appellant-defendants

did not maintain the transformer and stay wire etc., therefore,

learned first appellate court has not committed any error in

holding that the incident took place due to negligency of

appellant-defendant-Vidhyut Vitran Nigam.

So far as the compensation of Rs.80,000/- awarded by

learned first appellate court is concerned, in my considered

opinion, there is no specific evidence on record about value of

buffalo, therefore, I am of the opinion that compensation amount

of Rs.60,000/- is appropriate instead of Rs.80,000/-. Hence, this

second appeal deserves to be partly allowed.

In view of above, this appeal is partly allowed. The

compensation amount of Rs.80,000/- is reduced to Rs.60,000/-.

The appellant-defendant is directed to pay Rs.60,000/- to the

respondent-plaintiff within a period of two months from today,

failing which the respondent-plaintiff shall be entitled to get

interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this

judgment.