Pay over

New Delhi, The Delhi High Court has awarded over ₹11 lakh as compensation to the family of a 45-year-old man who died after the balcony of their second-floor DDA apartment collapsed in July 2000.
Justice Dharmesh Sharma observed that negligence of the Delhi Development Authority was the “direct cause” of the balcony collapse, holding that the authority had the continuing obligation to ensure the infrastructure’s durability and longevity post-allotment.
The judge asked the authority to pay to the widow and two children of the deceased the amount of ₹11.44 lakh with interest at the rate of six per cent per annum from the date of filing of the present writ petition in January 2001.
The family was occupying a second floor apartment in the multi-storied project developed by the DDA for low and medium-income groups in Jhilmil Colony.
The petitioners alleged that the construction of the property was of substandard quality, with its plaster peeling off within five to six years of construction while it should have lasted 40-50 years.
“It is clear that the DDA’s negligence was the direct cause of the balcony collapse… The DDA had a continuing obligation to ensure the infrastructure’s durability and longevity post-allotment.
“The facts of this case unequivocally demonstrate that latent construction defects, which should have been timely addressed, were the root cause. The DDA was responsible for rectifying these defects, either directly or through its agencies,” said the judgement passed on November 13.
“A writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondent DDA to pay a total compensation of ₹11,44,908 to the petitioners in the ratio of 2:1:1 to the widow and the two children respectively, with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the present writ petition i.e., 11.01.2001 till realization within a period of six weeks from today,” the court ordered.
The DDA opposed the plea on the grounds that responsibility for poor or no-maintenance was of the resident and since the flats were constructed in the year 1986-87, the agency was not responsible for maintaining them after such a long period of time.
The Authority also said the area was de-notified in 1993 and all building activities, including maintenance, were transferred to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi .
The court, in its judgment, said there was no evidence to suggest that the deceased or his family members took any deliberate action to contribute to the seepage or dampness in the area and DDA was accountable for the quality, strength and lifespan of the balcony’s superstructure.
“An ordinary person cannot be expected to detect structural defects in their balcony. Notably, the Jhilmil DDA Flats Residents Association had repeatedly alerted the DDA to poor construction quality and substandard materials, but their concerns were consistently ignored,” it noted.
The court also said no blemish could be attributed to the MCD when it was the DDA that constructed the flats in question.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.