GETCO To Pay Compensation For Electrocution Death Applying Principles Of Strict Liability; Can’t Claim Negligence Of Deceased: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court was considering an Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure by Gujarat Energy Transmission Company.

Justice J.C. Doshi, Gujarat High Court
While upholding the compensation in favour of the family of a man who died due to electrocution, the Gujarat High Court has held that Gujarat Energy Transmission Co. Ltd. (GETCO) is required to pay compensation for the death, applying principles of strict & absolute liability, and it cannot claim negligence of deceased.
The High Court was considering an Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 by the appellant – Gujarat Energy Transmission Co. Ltd. (GETCO) challenging the judgment of the Trial Court partly decreeing the Special Civil Suit and directing the GETCO to pay Rs 9,40,000 with interest.
The Single Bench of Justice J. C. Doshi stated, “There is no cavil that the appellant is engaged in the business of selling hazardous product viz. Electricity. It is the liability of the appellant – GETCO to maintain all the wires to have insulated them to prevent the incident. If any incident occurs, the principle of absolute liability shall be attracted. Thus, without touching the merits of the case considering the fact that the GETCO is engaged in selling the hazardous substance, is required to pay compensation for death of the deceased applying the principles of strict and absolute liability.”
Advocate Jayant P Bhatt represented the Appellant while Advocate Henil M Shah represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The plaintiffs are the legal heirs of the deceased Gemarsinh Sodha, who used to work as a Maldhari. On April 24, 2003, the deceased was proceeding along with sheep and goats when he was electrocuted because of 66 k.v. current. The deceased sustained serious injuries and died during the course of treatment at the Hospital. Claiming the aforesaid incident as the absolute negligence on the part of the GETCO, the plaintiff sought for compensation for her husband to the tune of Rs 10 lakh with interest. It was the case of defendant GETCO that the incident took place due to the sole negligence of the deceased. It was the deceased who was required to take necessary care to avoid the mishap. The Trial Court partly decreed the suit and directed the GETCO to pay Rs 9,40,000 with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. Aggrieved thereby, the GETCO preferred the First Appeal.
Reasoning
Considering that an undertaking such as GETCO is involved in the activity of supplying electricity, which involves hazardous or risky exposure to human life, the Bench explained that the law of torts recognises them to be liable for injury suffered by any other person, irrespective of any negligence or carelessness on the part of the Electricity Company. “The basis of such liability is the foreseeable risk inherent in the very nature of such activity. The liability cast on such person is known, in law, as "strict liability". Concept of strict liability or absolute liability differs from concept of fault liability which arises on account of negligence or fault in this way i.e. the concept of negligence comprehends that the foreseeable harm could be avoided by taking reasonable precautions”, it added.
The Bench was of the view that the defendant was to be held liable regardless of whether it could have avoided the particular harm by taking precautions.
“In view of above and in extenso of principles of strict liability or absolute liability, the GETCO would not be at privilege to claim negligence of the deceased Thus, the present First Appeal requires fate of only dismissal”, it held.
Cause Title: Gujarat Energy Transmission Company Ltd. v. Naniba (Neutral Citation: 2026:GUJHC:34770)

