actual/exact proof of damage is not given by the appellants. At
the same time, we find that the trial court had appointed Court
Commissioners to verify the position of agricultural lands of the
appellants. The said Court Commissioners, also known as
panchas, had visited the site and submitted their report for
inspection confirming the loss suffered by the appellants due to
submergence of the agricultural fields of the appellants. In this
report, they specifically pointed out that as many as 1500 boar
trees were uprooted and washed away as a result of the release
of water from the dam which flooded the fields of the appellants.
Several photographs were also annexed along with the report to
support the aforesaid conclusion. This kind of evidence, which
went unrebutted, proves that the appellants have, in fact, suffered
damages. No doubt, the appellants have not led any evidence to
show actual cost of each tree, in order to arrive at the precise
quantum of damages. However, even in the absence of such an
evidence showing exact loss suffered, the appellants would still
be entitled to reasonable compensation once factum of suffering
loss stands proved. Where a wrong has been committed, the
wrong-doer must suffer from the impossibility of accurately
ascertaining the amount of damages. Likewise, the party claiming
compensation must give the best evidence to prove damages. In
the instant case, we find that the loss is not only on account of
rain, though a part thereof can be attributed to the nature, but also
due to the negligence on the part of the respondent authorities in
not taking due precautions in time which could have avoided
some loss/damage, if not entirely. If damage has resulted from
two or three causes, namely, from an act of God as well as a
negligent act of a party, the award of damages can be
apportioned to compensate only the injury that can be attributed
to the negligent act of the respondents {See Workman v. G.N.
Ry. Co.11}
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1866 OF 2016
VOHRA SADIKBHAI RAJAKBHAI Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Dated: MAY 10, 2016.
Citation:(2016) 12 SCC 1
