Jammu and Kashmir High Court: In a writ petition seeking compensation of Rs. 20 Lacs for hospitalization, treatment, pain, mental agony, future prospects, and permanent disability in a case of receiving an electric shock from a snapped 11 KV line, a single-judge bench of Vinod Chatterji Koul, J., held that the petitioner is entitled to compensation due to the severe injuries and permanent disability sustained from the electric shock and directed the respondent to pay Rs. 20 Lacs compensation to the petitioner, along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition until the final realization.
In the instant matter, on 09-03-2007, the petitioner, aged 8, was playing near a live electric transformer in Kujjar, Kulgam, when he received an electric shock from a snapped 11 KV line. The incident resulted in severe burn injuries and the amputation of his left arm. The petitioner was treated at SKIMS, Srinagar, where extensive plastic surgery and other treatments were performed. A police report and FIR were registered at Police station Yaripora verifying the incident. A Medical Board later declared the petitioner 75% disabled.
The petitioner filed the present writ petition and claimed compensation of Rs. 20 Lacs for hospitalization, treatment, pain, mental agony, future prospects, and permanent disability. The petitioner, additionally, sought consideration for a suitable job to ensure his rehabilitation. However, the respondents, the Power Development Department, admitted the incident, but argued that no fault lay with them. The respondent pointed out the delay in filing the writ petition. and argued that the same should be dismissed.
The Court referred to M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1997) 2 SCC 353, where the Supreme Court established the principle of strict and absolute liability for enterprises engaged in hazardous activities causing harm. The Supreme Court held that “where an enterprise is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity and harm is caused on any one on account of the accident in the operation of such activity, the enterprise is strictly and absolutely liable to compensate those who are affected by the accident; such liability is not subject to any of the exceptions to the principle of strict liability under the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher.” The Court also reviewed Kishan Gopal v. Lala, (2014) 1 SCC 244, where the Supreme Court directed compensation for a non-earning minor in the case of death or disability and Master Mallikarjun v. National Insurance Co. Ltd., (2014) 14 SCC 396, where the Supreme Court awarded compensation to a minor with a disability.
The Court stated that there is no quarrel about 78% disability of petitioner is due to electric shock which he suffered when he was eight years old.
The Court noted that the petitioner has trans-elbow amputation left side with scarring/puckering of over lung skin and percentage of disability is around 75% from orthopedic side and has15% deformity disability and the same is confirmed by the Standing Medical Board and other medical records.
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to compensation due to the severe injuries and permanent disability sustained from the electric shock. The Court directed the respondents to pay Rs. 20.00 Lacs to the petitioner, along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition until the final realization of the amount.
[Abrar Ahmad Tantray v. State of J&K, 2024 SCC OnLine J&K 639, Decided on 22-07-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr Ateeb Kanth, Counsel for the Petitioner
Mr. Alla ud din Ganai, AAG with Ms. Shaila Shameem, Counsel for the Respondents
