2009 PLP 603 (YLR)
CHAIRMAN PESCO, and 4 others — Petitioners Versus FAIZ ULLAH — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 603 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Alam Khan, J |
| Parties | CHAIRMAN PESCO, and 4 others — Petitioners Versus FAIZ ULLAH — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 603 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 603 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Muhammad Alam Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 603 (YLR) (CHAIRMAN PESCO, and 4 others — Petitioners Versus FAIZ ULLAH — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Minhajud Din Alvi for Petitioners.
- Faizullah for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 14th October, 2008.
Headnotes / Summary
O. VII, R.2
Plaintiff brought a suit against the Chairman of WAPDA and five others/defendants for recovery of Rs. 60,000 as price of cow which died due to negligence of defendants
Plaintiff had alleged that during fateful night, a windstorm had blown, as a result of which two electric poles fell down about which Authorities were duly informed, but they` failed to disconnect the electric supply to the fallen electric poles; and that due to said negligence of defendants, cow of the plaintiff was killed
Suit was concurrently decreed by the Trial Court and Appellate Court to the tune of Rs.35,000 instead of Rs. 60,000 as prayed by the plaintiff
Record had revealed that at the relevant time, electric poles containing 4400 Volts direct supply, fell to the ground due to the windstorm about which WAPDA functionaries were duly informed, but they did not take any remedial action and due to their negligence the cow of the plaintiff was killed on receipt of electric shock
Local Police was also informed of the situation
Functionaries of the State were jointly and individually liable of their acts and omissions
Judgment and decrees of the two courts below being well-reasoned, based on facts and law on established principles of appreciation of evidence, called for no interference by the High Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under S.115, C.P.C.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J.
Faizullah son of Abdur Rahim brought a suit against the Chairman WAPDA and five others for the recovery of Rs.60, 000 as price of cow died due to the negligence of the WAPDA. It is alleged that during the night of 28/29th April, 2006, a windstorm blown as a result of which two electric poles in the village fell down for which the WAPDA Authorities were duly informed but they failed to disconnect the electric supply to the fallen electric poles and thus due to their negligence cow of the plaintiff/ respondent was done to death.
2. After submission of written statement by the defendants and framing of issues, the learned trial Court vide judgment dated 30-4-2007 decreed the suit of the plaintiff to the tune of Rs.35,000 instead of Rs.60,000 as prayed in the plaint which was maintained in appeal vide judgment and decree of the learned District Judge Tank dated 2-7-2008. Hence this revision petition.
3. Mr. Minhajuddin Alvi, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the falling of the electric poles was due to the windstorm blown for which the concerned WAPDA Authorities were not informed in time and thus the plaintiff/ respondent was not entitled to the decretal amount as he was equally responsible for the alleged negligence.
4. I have gone through the record and considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners.
5. Perusal of the record reveals that at the relevant time, the electric poles fallen to the grounds due to the windstorm blown was 4400 volts direct supply for which the WAPDA functionaries were duly informed but they did not take care and thus with their negligence, the cow of the plaintiff was killed on receipt of electric shock. Furthermore, the local police was also informed of the situation. The functionaries of the State are jointly and individually liable of their acts and omissions as held in the case of Government of Pakistan and others v. Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Khan reported in PLD 1978 Peshawar page 10 and a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Government of N.W.F.P through Collector Martian v. Saeed-ur-Rahman and others, reported in 2004 CLC 1682.
6. Thus in view of the dictum handed down in the above two cases, the impugned judgments and decrees of the two Courts' below are well-reasoned, based on facts and law on the established principles of appreciation of evidence, which calls for no interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under section 115 C.P.C.
7. Resultantly, this civil revision petition fails which is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./20/P Revision dismissed.