Delhi High Court Directs Northern Railway, Contractor To Pay Over ₹23 Lakh To Parents Of 12-Yr-Old Boy Who Died After Falling In Unprotected Pit
The Delhi High Court has directed the Northern Railway and a contractor, who was engaged for construction work of a rainy well, to pay over Rs. 23 lakhs compensation to parents of a 12 years old boy who died after falling and drowning in the pit in 2013. A division bench of Justice Najmi Waziri and Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain directed that the compensation be paid along with simple interest @...
The Delhi High Court has directed the Northern Railway and a contractor, who was engaged for construction work of a rainy well, to pay over Rs. 23 lakhs compensation to parents of a 12 years old boy who died after falling and drowning in the pit in 2013.
A division bench of Justice Najmi Waziri and Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain directed that the compensation be paid along with simple interest @ 6% from date of filing of the petition which was moved by the parents in 2019, till realization of compensation within three months.
The incident happened on a vacant land in between Pilli Mitti Railway line and Metro line in city’s Kailash Nagar which was used by the children of the locality as a playground.
“The children of the locality used to play on said open land in which the unsecured rainy well was dug up; while playing in the said area the boy of 12 years fell into the pit/trench and lost his life. Evidently, neither of the respondents had taken appropriate care and erected/installed safety measures at the site, to prevent any unwanted and unfortunate incident, like the one which resulted in death of the deceased. The respondents were neither vigilant nor sensitive in taking appropriate safety measures at the site to avoid any unfortunate accident,” the bench said.
It added that it was the duty of Northern Railway and the contractor to take proper diligence and care at the site to avoid any accident and that they were negligent in taking safety measures at the site to prevent any accident.
“The respondent no.1 (Northern Railway) cannot be absolved from its responsibility of taking proper safety measures at the site even after award of contract to the respondent no.2 (contractor). The respondents are jointly and severally liable for their act of negligence and to pay compensation to the appellants,” the court said.
The court was hearing an appeal moved by the parents challenging the judgment of the single judge dated 29.10.2018 dismissing their plea for damages and compensation of Rs. 15 lakhs from Northern Railway and the contractor, along with 12% interest from the date of filing of the petition till its realization. The compensation was claimed on the methodology adopted for award of compensation in motor-vehicular accidents claims.
An FIR was registered in 2013 under sections 290 and 304A of Indian Penal Code implicating the contractor leading to his arrest. The FIR was however quashed by the High Court in 2015 on the basis of a settlement. The contractor had paid a compensation of Rs.3,10,000 to the parents.
Allowing the plea, the bench noted that the parents had received the compensation of Rs.3,10,000 from the contractor only towards discharge of criminal liability arising out of the FIR.
“The liability to pay compensation for a civil wrong and a criminal wrong are independent to each other and mutually exclusive. The appellants cannot be denied to claim compensation from the respondents for the civil wrong pertaining to death of their minor son. The acceptance of the said compensation by the appellants is not good enough to defeat their legitimate claim of further compensation from the respondents. The respondents are liable to pay compensation to the appellants irrespective of receipt of Rs.3,10,000/- as compensation from the respondent no.2,” the court said.
It added that nothing was brought on record to show that the children were cautioned or restrained or forewarned from playing in the open field where the construction work was going on. It observed that a young boy of about 12 years does not know the difference between a railways land or land of other civic agency.
“For children all open areas, lands and fields are for games, for running, fun and frolic. The petitioner says the young boy died when he slipped into the well. Now any reasonable person would foresee such fatal mishaps, if the dug-up trench/well was not secured/fenced-off/guarded to prevent such mishaps. This was the duty of the respondents to the public. They failed in their duty to care. Their negligence led to the loss of life of an innocent boy,” the court said.
Title: SHARAFAT KHAN & ANOTHER v. NORTHERN RAILWAY & ANOTHER
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 504