High Court · 2012

that the foreseeable harm could be avoided by taking reasonable precautions. If the defendant did all that which could be done for avoiding the harm he cannot be held liable when the action is based on any negligence attributed. But such c onsideration is not relevant in cases of strict liability where the defendant is held liable irrespective of whether he could have avoided the particular harm b y taking precautions. (cid:29) Again, this Court in the case of (cid:28)Mosht. Amena Bewa Vrs. Assam State Electricity Board & Ors.; reported in 2007 (3) GLT 32 held as under: (cid:28)12. Under the law, a very onerous obligation is cast on the Board in transmitti ng and supplying electrical energy. Having regard to the nature of the enterpris e undertaken, the Board has to be extra vigilant and cautious so much so that th e lives and properties of persons are not exposed to any risk or fatal consequen ces. This makes it incumbent on the Board to be meticulously watchful about the installation for supplying such energy so that any omission it maintaining the s ame would make it liable for all adverse consequences flowing therefrom followin g the principle of strict liability. (cid:28) In view of the above and on consideration of the report of the Senior Electrical Inspector, I am of the view that the ASEB is liable to pay compensation to the petitioner for the death of his minor daughter. Having held so, the quantum of compensation is now required to be determined. In the said judgment of Mosht. Amena Bewa (supra), this Court has held that compen sation under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is in the nature of pallia tive and some guess work is inevitable. But the same has to be reasonable. The ASEB had issued a memorandum dated 22.12.2008 fixing the scale of compensati on for victims of electrical accidents. In case of death of a person up-to the a ge of 20 years, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been fixed. This office memorandum w as issued in the year 2008. In view of the present financial condition prevailing in the country, I am of th e opinion that the said amount is definitely on the lower side. Considering the same and also considering the tender age of the victim, I am of the view that a tentative compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- would meet the ends of justice. The amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- shall be deposited by the ASEB in the Registry of t his Court within a period of six weeks from today and shall be released to the p etitioner on proper identification by his counsel. If the petitioner is dissatisfied with the aforesaid amount of compensation, it would be open for him to institute an appropriate proceeding before the competen t civil court claiming higher compensation. This disposes of the writ petition.