Telangana High Court: Barring People with over Two Children From Polls Violates No Fundamental Right || Del HC Clarifies That Breach of Promise to Marry is Not The Same as False Promise Amounting To Rape || Delhi High Court Rules Law Students Cannot be Barred From Exams For Not Meeting Minimum Attendance || Delhi HC: Only a Sessions Court, Not an Ilaqa Magistrate, Can Order Further Probe After Committal || Allahabad High Court: Protecting Homebuyers’ Interests is Paramount in Real Estate Insolvency || Allahabad HC: Police Can Freeze Accounts on Suspicion; Affected Party May Seek Magistrate’s Relief || NCLAT: Claimants Must Prove Asset Ownership; Liquidator Need Not Establish Title of Assets in Custody || NCLAT: Director’s Resignation Doesn’t Release Personal Guarantor from Continuing Guarantee Liability || NCLAT: Delay Condonable When Composite Appeal Filed in Time is Refiled after Registry’s Objection || Supreme Court: Upper Floors Can be Converted for Commercial Use Only after Paying Conversion Charges

Yog Raj and Ors. v. The State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. - (National Green Tribunal) (30 Jul 2015)

Compensation for damage 'safely inferred' to have been caused by activity

MANU/GT/0127/2015

Noting that the Applicants had filed an application 5 years after construction work by the Respondents had stopped, no major structural damage had occurred to the Applicants' houses and no technical nexus was found between the damage caused and the Respondent's activities, the Tribunal was nevertheless inclined to award the Applicants an amount to repair their houses. The Respondent's were ordered to make good the damage that was suffered, since it could be 'safely inferred' that the damage was caused by their activities, the Tribunal held.

Relevant : Bhopal Gas Peedith Mahila Udyog Sangathan v. Union of India & Ors." MANU/SC/0642/2012

Tags : CONSTRUCTION DAMAGE NEXUS

Share :