- (1.) A tragic incident, due to collapse of a multi-storeyed building under construction took place on 12.09.1983 in the afternoon and resulted in the death of 118 persons and injuries to about 50 persons. A Commission was set up to find out the real cause leading to collapse of the building. The Commission of Inquiry was headed by a High Court Judge which submitted its report in 1986. A public interest litigation was filed sometime in the year 1988 purporting to espouse the cause of those who had died and those who had been injured. By the impugned judgment, a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court directed grant of compensation by the Bangalore City Corporation and the State Government.
(2.) The details relating to the quantum are set out in para 11 of the impugned judgment. The appellant Corporation in this appeal primarily has taken the stand that for a case allegedly relating to tortious liability, a writ petition much less a public interest litigation was not the appropriate remedy. It is pointed out that the building was under construction and a private builder was undertaking the construction work. Therefore the direction for payment of compensation by the Corporation and the State Government is not in order. In any event, it was submitted that different sums have been sanctioned as ex gratia payment by the Corporation and the State Government. Some amount per head per death has also been sanctioned from the Prime Minister's Relief Fund.
(3.) Pursuant to the directions dated 22.04.2004 it is submitted that a consideration was made by the Corporation as to if any further amount can be paid by way of ex gratia payment. By way of an affidavit it is pointed out that in addition to what has been paid by the Corporation, from the Chief Minister's Fund and the Prime Minister's Relief Fund a sum of Rs. 12,000.00 for each case of death and Rs. 3000.00 for each injury case has been agreed to be paid by the Corporation. Learned counsel appearing for one of the representatives of the victims submitted that an application for enhancement has been filed in this case. Though a writ petition for compensation in a case where factual controversies are involved would not be appropriate, yet in certain cases where the factual position is not disputed a writ petition may be entertained. We need not go into that question in detail in the present appeal, as we feel that the representatives of the victims may accept the amount to be paid by the Corporation without prejudice to their claims which may be agitated in a competent court having necessary jurisdiction. A question regarding limitation may arise. But that can be taken care of if the period till today is excluded because of the pendency of the various proceedings before the High Court and this Court. The disbursement shall be made by the Registrar of the Karnataka High Court to be nominated by the Hon ble the Chief Justice of that Court. The deposit shall be made by the Corporation within four weeks from today with the Registry of the Karnataka High Court. With the aforesaid observations the appeals stand disposed of.;