U.P. State Power Corp. Ltd. found liable for injuries caused by a snapped high-tension wire, compensation affirmed despite appeal.
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court, presided over by Justice Sandeep Jain, upheld the principle of strict liability in a civil case involving electrocution from a snapped high-tension electricity line. The case, U.P. State Power Corp. Ltd. v. Moh. Nisar Alias Bade Lalla, revolved around a tragic incident on January 2, 2007, where the plaintiff, Moh. Nisar, suffered severe burn injuries due to electrocution caused by a fallen live wire.
The court reaffirmed the lower court's decision, which had awarded Nisar a compensation of Rs. 3,87,500 along with interest for the injuries sustained. The decision rested on the well-established legal doctrine that in cases of electrocution from high-tension lines, the electricity provider bears strict liability. This means the plaintiff is not required to prove negligence on the part of the electricity provider but only needs to establish that the injuries were a direct result of electrocution.
The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the U.P. State Power Corp. Ltd., which argued that the plaintiff had failed to prove the occurrence of the incident and that the snapped line would have automatically switched off the power supply. The court found the plaintiff's evidence, supported by medical records, witness testimonies, and a disability certificate, compelling and upheld the trial court's findings.
Justice Jain emphasized that the principle of strict liability applies to such cases, as electricity is considered a hazardous substance. The ruling cited several precedents, including the Supreme Court's judgments in MP Electricity Board v. Shail Kumari and Parvati Devi v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi, to reinforce that the responsibility lies with the electricity provider to ensure safety and prevent such mishaps.
The judgment also addressed the calculation of compensation, considering factors like loss of future earnings, medical expenses, and the plaintiff's permanent disability. While the trial court awarded a total of Rs. 4,00,000, adjusted to Rs. 3,87,500 after accounting for an amount already granted by the Collector, the High Court noted that the compensation was inadequate but could not be increased as the plaintiff had not appealed.
This ruling serves as a reminder of the stringent obligations placed on electricity providers to maintain their infrastructure and the legal protections available to victims of electrocution incidents.
Bottom Line:
In cases of electrocution caused by a snapped high-tension electricity line, the principle of strict liability applies. The plaintiff is not required to prove negligence of the electricity provider but only to establish that the injuries resulted from electrocution.
Statutory provision(s): Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991, Section 96 C.P.C., Principle of Strict Liability
