Karnataka High Court
WA/1966/2025 of SRI. KRISHNE GOWDA. K. T, Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 20 August 2026
CNR: KAHC010802622025 NC: 2026:KHC:44929-DB WA No. 1966 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT APPEAL NO.1966 OF 2025 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: 1.
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT APPEAL NO.1966 OF 2025 (GM-KEB)
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI. KRISHNE GOWDA K.T.
S/O. LATE THIMME GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
R/AT KATHARAGHATTA VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI, K.R. PET TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 426.
2.
SMT. NAGARATHNA,
W/O. KRISHNA GOWDA K.T.
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT KATHARAGHATTA VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI, K.R. PET TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 426.
3.
SMT. SHILPA,
D/O. KRISHNE GOWDA K.T.
SISTER OF LATE SHIVA KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/AT KATHARAGHATTA VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI, K.R. PET TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 426.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RUDRESH S., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. DEEPAK M., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
MAHALAKSHMI B M
Location: High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
ENERGY DEPARTMENT,
ROOM NO.225, 2ND FLOOR,
VIKASA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR STREET,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2.
CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY
CORPORATION LIMITED (CESCOM)
(A GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING)
O AND M CIRCLE, CESC,
MANDYA-571 401.
3.
PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
SRI. WAHIDA AKHTAR,
S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
AGE- NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER
HARIHARAPURA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
KASABA HOBLI, K.R. PET TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 605.
4.
WATER MAN,
SRI. PREM KUMAR,
S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
AGE- NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
KATHARAGHATTA VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI, K.R. PET TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 426.
5.
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
SRI. FAZIL AHAMMAD,
S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
AGE- NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY
CORPORATION LIMITED (CESCOM)
O AND M CIRCLE, CESC,
K.R. PET TALUK, MANDYA-571 401.
6.
SMT. NIKITHA,
W/O. LATE SHIVA KUMAR,
HC-KAR
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
R/AT. SAKSHIBEEDU VILLAGE,
AKKI HEBBAL HOBLI,
K.R. PETE TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 605.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.R. KHAMROZ KHAN, AGA FOR R-1)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED 24.06.2025
PASSED IN W.P.NO.23161/2024.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. For the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application, I.A No.2/2026, is allowed. The delay of 128 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
2. The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning the order dated 24.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. No.23161/2024 (GM-KEB), whereby the said petition was not entertained, on the ground that it involved disputed
HC-KAR
questions of fact. The appellants had filed the said petition, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to respondent Nos.1 to 5 to jointly and severally pay compensation of `50,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 18% to the petitioners and respondent No.6 for the death of Sri Shiva Kumar.
3. The appellants are the parents and sister of late Shiva Kumar, while respondent No.6 is his widow. Shiva Kumar died on 23.04.2023. It is the case of the appellants that his death was caused due to the negligence on part of the officials of the Karnataka Electricity Board [KEB] and the other respondents.
4. The deceased was employed as a Supplier at Shivam Tea Coffee Centre, located at No.4141-4115, HAL Old Airport Road, HAL 2nd Stage, Kodihalli, Bengaluru. He was aged about 35 years at the time of the incident. It is stated that, on 23.04.2023 at about 09.00 a.m., the deceased had gone to the agricultural field situated close to his residence to undertake certain agricultural work. It is stated that, prior to the said date, the officials of the KEB had installed seven-foot poles in the said field to facilitate the supply of drinking water through a borewell powered by an 11-kilowatt
HC-KAR
electricity connection. The said wires passed over the appellants' property and were noticed that they were hanging at a dangerously low height.
5. The appellants claimed that this was brought to the notice of the Waterman of Katharaghatta Village (respondent No.4), who was requested to address the issue and take steps to rectify the same. They further claimed that the PDO was also informed of the said issue and requested to take corrective measures. Despite the same, none of the concerned authorities had taken any steps to rectify the defect. While the deceased was working in the field, the three-phase electricity wire fell on his neck, rendering him unconscious. He was thereafter taken to the hospital, where he was declared bought dead.
6. Based on the above, an FIR was also lodged (Crime No.91/2023) for offences punishable under Sections 304 (A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The facts as claimed by the appellants are not admitted by the respondents.
HC-KAR
7. The petition is premised on certain disputed questions of fact, which would require to be proved. As is apparent, the appellants' claim is based on an allegation of negligence, which requires to be established.
8. In the given circumstances, we find no fault with the decision of the learned Senior Judge in declining to entertain the writ petition on the aforesaid ground.
9. In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed. However, it is clarified that this would not preclude the appellants from initiating appropriate proceedings seeking compensation as claimed.
Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE
MBM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12