Delhi High Court Rules DDA Must Keep Flat Safe Even After Many Years: Compensation Ordered for Death from Balcony Fall.
The Delhi High Court awarded compensation to a family after a balcony of a Delhi Development Authority (DDA) flat fell, leading to a family member’s death. The Court noted that the DDA had a duty to maintain the property, even though it was built many years ago. The case involved a Writ Petition asking for a Central Bureau of Investigation inquiry to hold responsible officials accountable and to compensate the family for medical costs, emotional distress from the loss of the husband, and for balcony repairs. Justice Dharmesh Sharma stated, “The DDA must ensure the infrastructure remains safe and durable after it is allotted. This case clearly shows that hidden construction flaws, which should have been fixed earlier, caused the incident. The DDA is responsible for correcting these issues, either directly or through its agents.”
Advocate D.K. Rustagi represented the family, while Advocate Ashish Dhingra represented the DDA. The Court heard from the wife and sons of a man who lived in Jhilmil Colony, Delhi. In 2000, the balcony of their flat collapsed, leading to the man’s fatal injuries. The family requested Rs. 12 lakh in compensation, claiming that DDA officials used poor-quality materials to misappropriate funds. An inspection team found that the building did not meet safety standards, yet the DDA continued to allocate flats, according to Court documents.
The DDA argued that the maintenance responsibility fell on the property owner or resident, stating that since the flats were built around 1986, they were no longer liable for upkeep. They claimed the balcony’s collapse in the Petitioner’s flat was likely due to water leaking through floor cracks, noting that other balconies in the building were still intact. The Court pointed out that the issue was more than just simple seepage or dampness, stating that “an ordinary person cannot be expected to detect structural defects in their balcony.” The Court also mentioned that a residents’ association had repeatedly informed the DDA about the poor construction quality and substandard materials, but their warnings were ignored. As a result, the Court ordered the DDA to pay a total compensation of Rs. 11,44,908 to the Petitioners, to be shared among the wife and two sons in a 2:1:1 ratio within six weeks.
Cause Title: Promila Rastogi v. Delhi Development Authority [2024:DHC:8773]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate D.K. Rustagi, Karan Malhotra and Jagesh Singh
Respondent: Advocate Ashish Dhingra
