Law: Fatal Accidents Act, 1855

Section: 1

Law: Electricity Rules, 1937

Section: R.49

(a) Fatal Accidents Act (XIII of 1855)-------S. 1---Fatal accident---Suit for compensation---Rule of "res ipsa loquitur", meaning and applicability of---Case of plaintiff was that her son aged eleven years had died on account of electric shock caused to him when he came into contact with an energized electric pole erected by the Electric Company---Plaintiff had claimed that death of her son was caused due to the negligence, default and wrong act of the company which had failed to take adequate measures to curb the danger that prevailed in the street---Death of son of plaintiff, cause of death and place of death were not denied by the company---Onus of proof, in circumstances, shifted on the company to show that it was not due to their negligence that the death occurred---Plaintiff as a general rule has to prove negligence of defendant- and it was not for the defendant to disprove same, but in cases where true cause of death lay solely within the knowledge of defendant then such hardship would be avoided by invoking the rule of "res ipsa loquitur" (the thing speaks for itself)---Cause of death of deceased was electrocution by electric poles erected by the company and it was within the knowledge of company that electricity could cause damage and even could kill a person---Had company been cautious and carried out its duty diligently, the accident could have been avoided---Plaintiff could prove the accident, but could not prove as to how it happened so as to show its origin in the negligence of the defendants--�Company could not establish by whatever evidence that it was not liable and had miserably failed to show that it acted diligently---Case of plaintiff having fully been proved against the company, suit was decreed and amount of compensation was determined taking into consideration age and earning capacity of the deceased.(b) Maxim-------Res ipsa loquitur"---Meaning, scope and applicability dilated upon.Mst. Kamina .v. Al-Amin Goods Agency 1992 SCMR 1715; Ursulina D'Lima and others v. Orient Airways Limited and another PLD 1960 Kar. 712; Pakistan Steel Mills Corporation Ltd. V. Malik Abdul Habib 1993 SCMR 848; Qazi Arifuddin _ and another v. Government of…