Compensation Uphar Cinema theatre fire Unauthorised construction Threat to safety of the public Damages awarded Law courts exist for the society and they have an obligation meet social aspirations of citizens When an enterprise is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous industry which poses a potential threat to the safety of persons working in premises or vicinity, owes an absolute and non-delegatable duty to patrons who visit same to ensure that no harm results to anyone on account of hazardous or inherent nature of activity which it has undertaken and it would be no answer to enterprise to say that harm has not been caused because of any negligence on its part; persons harmed on account of hazardous activity carried on by enterprise may not be in a position to isolate process of operation from hazardous preparation of substance or any other related element that caused the harm, enterprise must be held strictly liable for causing such harm as a part of the social cost of carrying on hazardous activity . [ Association of Victims of Uphar Tragedy vs Union of India. [2003]5 ILD 115 (Delhi). S.K.Mahajan and Mukun Mudgal (JJ)]
Municipality - Construction of underground shopping complex in park - Permission granted by Mahapalika - violatory of the obligation to maintain parks - Public Trust doctrine violated- Judicial discretion in moulding relief - How to be exercised. Mahapalika permitted a private builder to construct new underground shopping complex in a park of historical importance. Construction against Master Plan. Judicial discretion in moulding relief cannot be exercised which encourages illegality or perpetuates an illegality. Unauthorized construction , if it is illegal and cannot be compounded, has to be demolished. There is no way out. Judicial discretion cannot be guided by expediency. Justice has be rendered in accordance with law. Judges are not entitled to exercise discretion wearing of robes of judicial discretion and pass orders based solely on their personal predilections and peculiar dispositions. Judicial discretion whenever it is required to be exercised has to be in accordance with law and set legal principles. [M.I..Builders Pvt Ltd. Vs Radhey Shyam Sahu AIR 1999 SC 2468 = (1999)6 SCC 464. . ]
Municipal Building Rules Construction in violation No public safety endangered not public or section of public inconvenienced by reason of construction. Direction to demolish upper floor is not proper.Construction not following the floor area ratio. Actual area of deviation not lager. Neither public safety endangered nor public or section of public inconvenienced by reason of the construction. Direction by the High Court is not proper. [ M/s. Rajath Enterprises v. S.K.Sharma . AIR 1989 SC 860 = (1989)1JT 211 = 1989 (2) SCC 495. ]
Municipal Corporation Unauthorised construction Lethargy on part of Corporation. Lethargy on the part of the Corporation in not taking timely action against violators of law is to proliferation of illegality and unauthorised constructions in High Court observed that it is high time that Government should come up with law, which provides for mechanism to identify and punish violators of law, not only builders , but also officials , who encourage such builder in making illegal and unauthorised constructions , and also ensure that innocent purchasers who spend their hard earned money are not cheated by builders. [ Arvind .L.Abhyankar vs. Municipal Corpn. Of Hyderabad. AIR 2003 A.P. 94. ]
Unauthorised construction of Mandir on public land Removed If Mandir is constructed on the public land it must be removed forthwith . Single line order of the Supreme Court in public interest . [M.C.Mehta vs. Union of India. (2003)10 SCC 691. ]
Municipal Corporation Commercial complex in residential area .A commercial complex was proposed in a residential area Question being a disputed question of fact and law, High Court cannot interfere with the matter. [ Ratanlal.B.Atal vs. Amarnath. 2002 (4) Bom C.R. 123. ]
Municipal Unauthorised constructions Scheme for Regularisation No power to issue Government order. Every citizen needs a permission from the Municipality to construct and if such construction is made without permission the only consequence is the demolition of such building in addition to prosecution in terms of various provisions of the Act. Therefore, Government can issue directions in furtherance of the objective that no construction is made in the city without permission of the Municipal authorities, but it cannot subvert the Act itself and then take refuge under Section 679-E by saying that the Government has the power to issue directions. [Dr. C. Kulsum Reddy & others.v.State of A.P2002 (3) ALT 536 .Bilalnazki & E. Dharma Rao JJ.]
Municipal Building Rules Violation of building rules Every citizen has a right to challenge the unlawful construction.A citizen has a right to institute a suit with a view to ensure effective implementation of the Municipal regulations, even in the absence of a specific personal injury to the person suing. [ Saina and others vs. Konderi & others. 1984 KLT 428. ]