Kerala State Electricity Board vs Puzhadikkal Kadheeja

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.—Defendants in a suit for damages for loss of life as a result of an electricity accident are the appellants. The licensee, Kerala State Electricity Board, pleaded before the court below that the death was beyond its control and was the result of heavy rain and wind, whereby leaves of the coconut tree had fallen over the electric line. Such defence does not stand on the face of the doctrine of strict liability which will apply to such instances as laid down by the Apex Court and this Court in 2002 ACJ 337 (SC) , Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board Vs. Shail Kumari and Others, and Varghese and Thressiamma Vs. Kerala State Electricity Board, .

The deceased son of the respondents was 19 years old at the time of electrocution on 15.04.2002. The plaintiffs had pleaded that he was doing business and was on his way back to home after closing the shop. The court below applied the relevant yardsticks, including multiplier in the light of the dictum in KSEB v. Kamalakshmi Amma(1986 KLT 1124) and fixed compensation totalling to Rs. 1,92,000/- and ultimately granted relief of recovery by adding Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses and deducting the amounts already paid by the KSEB before the suit.

Having heard the learned counsel for parties and having considered the materials on record, we do not find any error in the appreciation of evidence or in fixing the quantum of compensation. The appeal, therefore, fails.

We, however, see that the plaintiffs had partly lost before the court below as regards the quantum of compensation. We are of the view that having regard to the marginalized sector to which the plaintiffs and their son belong and having regard to the nature of the litigation, the plaintiffs are entitled to an order that they need not pay any amount as court fee on the plaint claim.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed with costs, however, directing that no court fee shall be leviable from the plaintiffs in the suit from which this appeal arises and it is hereby ordered, in exercise of authority under Order XLI Rule 33 of the CPC read with Order XXXIII Rule 11(b) as amended by notification No. D1(A)-43450/86 dated 13.01.1999, that the plaintiffs need not pay such court fee. As a result of this direction, it is ordered that any remittance towards court fee made by the plaintiffs before the Village Officer, Purathur Village in Tirur Taluk in terms of receipt No. 72662(G. No. 7266130) shall be refunded to the first among the surviving plaintiffs. That shall be done within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment before the Village Officer.