In Brief
The widow and son of a bus driver who died from electrocution sought compensation under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855. The lower courts dismissed the claim on grounds of limitation, applying the two-year period under Article 82 of the Limitation Act. The appellants argued that the three-year residuary period (Article 113) should apply instead. The Supreme Court upheld the two-year limitation period, holding that Article 82, which specifically governs Fatal Accidents Act claims as suits relating to tort, takes precedence over the residuary provision. The Court nonetheless exercised discretionary power under Article 142 to award Rs. 7 lakhs compensation considering the accident occurred in 2008 and a government compensation scheme existed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.