Karnataka HC: A Neighbour Cannot be Charged With Matrimonial Cruelty under Section 498A IPC  ||  Revisional Power U/S 25B(8) of Delhi Rent Control Act is Supervisory; HC Cannot Revisit Facts  ||  Poverty Cannot Bar Parole; Rajasthan HC Waives Surety For Indigent Life Convict, Sets Guidelines  ||  Delhi High Court: Late Payment of TDS Does Not Absolve Criminal Liability under the Income Tax Act  ||  NCLT Kochi: Avoidance Provisions under Insolvency Code Aim to Restore, Not Punish, Parties  ||  Bombay High Court: In IBC Cases, High Courts Lack Parallel Contempt Jurisdiction over the NCLT  ||  Supreme Court: Concluded Auction Cannot Be Cancelled Merely To Invite Higher Bids at a Later Stage  ||  SC: In Customs Classification, Statutory Tariff Headings and HSN Notes Prevail over Common Parlance  ||  SC: Under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, Notice U/S 10(5) Must be Served on the Person in Possession  ||  Supreme Court: Only Courts May Condone Delay; Tribunals Lack Power Unless Statute Allows    

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 :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved