DELHI JAL BOARD Vs. RAJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

(2.) This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of a learned Single Judge dated 30th September, 2005. The facts in detail have been mentioned in the judgment of the learned Single Judge and hence it is not necessary for us to repeat the same except where necessary.

(3.) There is no dispute that one Vikas Gupta who was driving a scooter on 20.4.2003 at about 9 p.m. drove over a manhole which was three inches below the regular surface of the road and met with an accident. In para 5 of the writ petition it is alleged that there was no caution/sign board put at the site. Vikas Gupta received fatal injuries as a result of the accident. His right eye was crushed. There was bleeding from ear and nose. The flesh of his face scattered on the grill of the road divider. His teeth, blood and flesh scattered on the road. Due to the said injuries, Shri Vikas Gupta died on the spot. It is stated in paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit of Delhi Jal Board that: Admittedly, the manhole of the sewer line was covered properly, but the upper surface level of the manhole cover was not in tandem with the road surface level and this was the exact reason for the said fatal accident. That as far as the responsibility of levelling the road surface is concerned, the same lies with the MCD. It is the responsibility of MCD to raise the plinth of the existing manholes, as and when, the plinth of the existing level of the road is raised by fresh carpeting.