IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2008 / 24TH ASWINA 1930 RFA.No. 616 of 2006() --------------------- OS.24/2003 of SUB COURT,KATTAPPANA .................... APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS ------------------------------------------ 1. K.S.E.B., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, K.S.E.BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.BOARD, CHITHIRAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE J.MATHEIKEL, SC, KSEB SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB RESPONDENT(S): PLAINTIFFS -------------------------- 1. THANKA, W/O. LATE RAJAPPAN, AGED 31, RESIDING AT PANIKKANDATHIL HOUSE, VARAPETTY P.O., VARAPETTY VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. 2. VEEPIL, S/O. LATE RAJAPPAN, AGED 13, RESIDING AT PANIKKANATHIL, VARAPETTY VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. 3. DELEEP, S/O. LATE RAJAPPAN, RESIDING AT PANIKKANDATHIL HOUSE, VARAPETTY P.O., VARAPETTY VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. 4. ANJU, D/O. LATE RAJAPPAN, AGED 6 YEARS, PANIKKANDATHIL HOUSE, VARAPETTY P.O., VARAPETTY VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. 5. AKHIL, S/O. LATE RAJAPPAN, AGED 2 1/2, RESIDING AT PANIKKANDATHIL HOUSE, VARAPETTY P.O., VARAPETTY VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. 6. KALI, AGED 85 YEARS, RESIDING AT PANIKKANDATHIL HOUSE, VARAPETTY P.O., VARAPETTY VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- R.F.A.No.616 of 2006 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph,J. The defendants in O.S.No.24/2003 on the file of the Sub Court, Kattappana are the appellants. The suit was filed claiming compensation in connection with the electrocution of one Rajappan. The plaintiffs are the legal heirs - first plaintiff is the wife, plaintiffs 2 to 5 are the minor children and the 6th plaintiff is the mother. The suit was decreed granting a total compensation of Rs.2,09,500/- with 14% interest from the date of the suit till realisation. The deceased Rajappan was a trench worker for the BSNL at Choondal and on the fateful day, 8-7-2001, he was engaged in the work on the side of Pooppara-Bodimettu P.W.D. road. While doing the work Sri.Rajappan came into contact with the electric post and he was electrocuted on the spot. According to the plaintiffs Sri.Rajappan was earning at the rate of Rs.150/- per day and hence Rs.2 lakhs was claimed towards loss of income. Towards mental agony, loss of consortium, loss of love R.F.A.No.616 of 2006 -:2:- and affection, loss of estate, pain and suffering and funeral expenses another Rs.3 lakhs was claimed. 2. The main contention of the appellants is that there is no evidence to establish negligence on the part of the Electricity Board leading to the electrocution. We are afraid the contention cannot be appreciated since it has come out from the evidence of DW1, the Assistant Engineer of the Major Section, that the line was not properly maintained. Under the specified standards, porcelain insulator had been used in order to avoid shock in a 11 K.V. line But in the instant case it is the admitted position that PVC pipe was used instead of porcelain insulator and it is because of that only the energy passed on to the electric post. DW1 also gave evidence to the effect that a particular type of switch had been used for isolating the line. But the system was not properly maintained and there was no proper insulation on the cross bar for avoiding leakage. The feeble defence put up is that anti social elements had put up the PVC pipes and that resulted in the accident. Apart from such a bald version there is no evidence to establish the case. Thus the staff employed by the KSEB to maintain the line had not discharged their duty properly by R.F.A.No.616 of 2006 -:3:- making periodical check up regarding the safety of the 11 K.V. line. That laches on the part of the staff resulted in the leakage of electricity through the concrete pole and Sri.Rajappan, the trench worker, doing the job near the electric post, was thus electrocuted. 3. The deceased was aged 38. We find that the compensation has been worked out as per the second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in respect of fatal accidents. If that be so, the entitled compensation is Rs.6 lakhs and even if 1/3rd is reduced for his personal expenses, loss of income will be to the tune of Rs.4 lakhs. However, the plaintiffs had limited their claim to Rs.2 lakhs under that head. Towards the claim under various other heads to the tune of Rs.3 lakhs, what is granted is only Rs.9,500/-. We do not find any reason to interfere with the compensation in connection with the incidental expenses. 4. The last contention is with regard to interest. True, there is some force in the submission that there is no justification in granting 14% interest. But it is to be seen that the interest is claimed only from the date of the suit and not from the date of R.F.A.No.616 of 2006 -:4:- the cause of action. Even then it has to be observed that there is no justification in granting 14% interest since the interest granted during the said period in compensation cases is only 9- 10%. However, we do not think that for that only reason we should interfere with the judgment. We agree with the reasoning and finding regarding negligence and the reasonableness of the quantum of compensation. It will not be altogether out of context to note that in case the appeal is admitted the appellants will have to pay the balance court fee of Rs.13,935/-. Therefore, we make it clear that the award of interest at the rate of 14% shall not be taken as a precedent. In the above facts and circumstances of the case we do not find any merit in the appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) (K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE) ahg. KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ. --------------------------- R.F.A.No.616 of 2006 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 16th October, 2008