PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
Sh. Pravesh Kumar, S/o Sh. Vijay Masih – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Jal Board – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
The instant petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking compensation for the untimely and tragic death of the petitioners” nine-year-old son, namely Master Justin/Joy (hereinafter referred as “deceased”), who fell into a pit and died allegedly due to the gross negligence and dereliction of duty on the part of the official respondents.
2. Petitioner No.1, i.e., father of the deceased, is stated to be working in Sun City restaurant, Netaji Subhash Place, Delhi as a Supervisor and petitioner No.2, i.e., mother of the deceased, is an Assistant Teacher in recognized St. Mother Teresa Public School, Burari, Delhi. The petitioners also have an eleven-year-old daughter, namely, Navya and both the children of the petitioners were studying in the same school where their mother was teaching.
3. On the fateful day i.e., 20.07.2016, the deceased and some other children were flying kites on the roof of their respective houses. While chasing a cut-off kite, the deceased was running towards the vacant ground owned by respondent No.1-Delhi Jal Board (hereinafter referred as “DJB”), when unfortunately, he slipped and fell down in a pit dug in the vacant land.
4.
Nilabati Behara v. State of Orissa
Nilabati Behara, D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal
MCD v. Uphaar Tragedy Victims Assn
The court established that the principle of res ipsa loquitur applies in cases of State negligence, allowing for compensation claims without needing to prove fault.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the differentiation between civil and criminal negligence, emphasizing the entitlement of the claimants to seek further compensation despite receiv....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the duty of the court to grant 'just compensation' under the PLI Act, considering the age, income, and dependents of the deceased, as per the princ....
The court established that municipal authorities have a statutory duty to ensure public safety by controlling stray animals, and failure to do so constitutes negligence, which can result in liability....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the duty of care owed by State authorities to provide a safe and secure environment for children, and the liability of the State for reparation of ....
Negligence of Municipal Authorities in failing to control stray dogs resulted in a child's death; they are liable for compensation under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The State is vicariously liable for compensation due to negligence in ensuring the safety of children in schools, as established under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.