LexMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI versus SUBHAGWANTI & OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A ' "' • B . c D E F G II MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELlll v. SUBHAGWANTI & OTHERS (With connected Appeals) February 24, 1966 [K. SUBBA RAO AND V. RAMAsWAMI, JJ.] Negligence-Clock tower belonging to M~nicipal Comm!ttee fallin~ Causing death of persons by-Whether doctrine of res ipsa loq'!'tu_r applies-Fatal Accidents Act, 1885, s. l-Damages-Quantum-Prmc1- ples for determining. Three suits for damages were filed by the respondents as heirs of thr~ persons who died as a result of the collapse of the Clock Tower m Chandni Chowk, Delhi, belonging to the appellant-Corporation, formerly the Municipal Committee of Delhi. The trial court held that it was the duty of the Municipal Committee to take proper care of buildings so that they should not prove a source of danger to persons using the highway as a matter of right, and granted decrees of Rs. 25,000, Rs. 15,000 and 20,000 respectively to the plaintifl'> in each of the three suits. On appeal to the High Court, although the decree for Rs. 25,000 in one of the suits was maintained, the amounts of Rs. 15,000 ancl Rs. 20,000 in the other two decrees were reduced to Rs. 7,200 and Rs. 9,000 respec- tively. The High Court held that the principle of res ipsa /oquitur applied to the case and considered that it was the duty of the Municipal Commit- tee to carry out periodical examination for the purpose of determining whether deterioration had taken place in the structure of the building and whether any precaution was necessary to strengthen it. Apart from super- ficial examination from time to time. there was no evidence of an exami:.. nation ever made with a view to seeing if there were any latent defects making the building unsafe. In the appeal to this Court, it was contended on behalf of the appellant that the High Court was wrong in applying the doctrine of res lpsa /oquitur to this case and that the fall of the clock tower was due to an inevitable accident which could not have been prevented by the exercise of reasonable care or caution; that since the defects which led to the collapse were latent, the appellant cGuld not be held guilty of negligence, and that in any event the damages awarded were excessive. HELD : The High Court was right in applying the doctrine res ipsa loquitur as in the circumstances of the case the mere fact that there was a fall of the clock tower, which was exclusively under the ownership and control of the appellant, would justify raising an inference of negli- &enco so as to establish a prima facie case against the appellant. [652 F, HI There is a special obligation on tho owner of adjGining premises for the safety of the structures which he keeps besides the highway. If these atructures fall into disrepair so as to be of potential danger to the passers- by or to be a nuisance, the owner is liable to anyone using the highway who is injured by reason of the disrepair. In such a case it is no defence for the owner to prove that he neither knew nor ought to have known al the danger. Jn other words, the owner is legally responsible irrespec- tive of whether the damage is caused by a patent or a latent defect. [653 E-G] ·650 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1966] 3 S.C.R. Wrlnge v. Cohen, [1940] 1 K.B. 229, Mint v. Good, [19511 1. K:.B. A 517 and Wal.sh v. Holst and Co. Ltd. and OTI. [1958] 1 W.LR. 800, referred to. The High Coun had applied the correct principles in estimation of the damages in all the three appeals. Davia v. Powell Dufjreifl Assoclo!ed Collieries Ltd. [19421 A. C. 601 and Nance v. Briti<h Columbia Electric Rm/way Company Lrd. 11951] B A.C. 601, referred to. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 1102-1104 of 1963. Appeals from the judgments and decrees dated November 27, 1959 of the Punjab High Court (Circuit Bench) at Delhi in Civil Regular First Appeals Nos. 69-D, 71-D and 85-D of 1963. C Bishan Narain, Sardar Balradur and Arun B. Saharya, for the appellant (in all the appeals). N.D. Bali and Din Dayal Sharma, for the respondents (in C. As. Nos. 1102 and 1103of1963). .A.G. Ratnaparkhi, for respondent (in C.A. No. 1104 of 19e3). The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Ramaswami, J. These appeals arise out of 3 suits for damages filed by the heirs of three persons, namely Shri Ram Parkash, Shrimati Panni Devi and Sant Gopi Chand who died as a result of the collapse of the Clock Tower situated opposite the Town Hall in the main Bazar of Chandi
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.