- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23304 WP No. 11431 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 11431 OF 2021 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: KAVYASHREE D/O SRI. NAGESH.B., AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, R/O AMARESH BUILDING, PAVITHRA RESIDENCY, NO.11, 2ND FLOOR, DODDATHOGURU, ELECTRIC CITY, BANGALORE-560 100. SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, SRI.NAGESH.B., …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.J.MAHESH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHAIRMAN, BESCOM, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560 009. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BESCOM, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560 009. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BESCOM, ELECTRONIC CITY SUB-DIVISION, ELECTRONIC CITY, BANGALORE-560 100. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23304 WP No. 11431 of 2021 4. SRI. AMARESH REDDY R/O AMARESH BUILDING, PAVITHRA RESIDENCY, DODDATHOGURU, ELECTRONIC CITY, BANGALORE-560 100. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.V.DEVARAJU., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO 3; SRI. YASHWANTH.C., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.G.SADASHIVAIAH., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.B.J.Mahesh., counsel for the petitioner, Sri.H.V.Devaraju., counsel for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri.Yashwanth.C., counsel on behalf of Sri.K.G.Sadashivaiah., for respondent No.4 have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- to the petitioner. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23304 WP No. 11431 of 2021 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that his daughter Ms.Kavyashree suffered severe injuries because of electrocution. Hence, he is seeking compensation in a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only). The contentions and the reliefs sought by the petitioner depicts that there are disputed question of facts and the same cannot be adjudicated under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The law is well settled that the disputed questions of fact cannot be investigated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner may take recourse under the law for seeking appropriate relief before the appropriate Forum, if so advised. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17