Chitambaresh, J.
We do not find any ground to interfere with the judgment and decree of the court below awarding compensation to the widow and minor children of the deceased who was electrocuted. The deceased was doing maintenance work on the Low Tension electricity lines when he came into contact with live 11 KV electricity lines only 1.5 meters apart. A co-worker has been examined and the court below was justified in holding that the Electricity Board was negligent in not keeping the 11 KV line dead at that time.
2. The court below has relied on Kerala State Electricity Board v. Kamalakshy Amma [1986 KLT 1124] to hold that the principles of 'res ipsa loquitur' can be applied to the instant case. Even the official of the Electricity Board candidly admitted in evidence that there is a chance of one getting into contact with 11 KV line while working on Low Tension lines. The Electricity Board should have switched off both 11 KV and Low Tension lines at the place before a worker is A.S.No.402/1999 2 permitted to go atop for work.
3. The clause in Ext.A1 work order that 'the Board will not be responsible for any accident caused to you or your workman while executing the work' does not absolve the Electricity Board from liability. The deceased was aged 26 years, his widow aged 25 years and the minor children aged only 4 years and 7 months respectively at the time of accident. The award of compensation of ` 3 lakhs with interest reckoning his monthly income and life expectancy cannot be said to be excessive or bloated in any manner.
The Appeal Suit is dismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, Judge.
nj/22.11.2016 //True copy// P.S.to Judge.