Feb 01

Supreme Order ratifies compensation against Airport Authorities of India

In an important judgment, the Supreme Court of India has ratified the order of the National Consumer Commission that had awarded an overall sum of Rs. 38.04 lakhs (including interest) compensation against the Airports Authority of India for dereliction leading to the death of a child. In a horrific incident on December 13, 1999, a family arriving at Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport saw their 7 year old daughter getting sucked into the gap at the end of the escalator and getting crushed to death. It was an incident that sparked a lot of outrage, more so, because this was an incident that could have been avoided.

The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld an order of the national consumer commission awarding Rs 38.04 lakh compensation to the mother of a seven-year-old girl who died after she was sucked into an escalator at Delhi’s international airport in December 1999. The order marked a stinging rebuke to the Airports Authority of India which, despite strong evidence pointing to its callousness in not maintaining the escalator, had sought to dispute the compensation granted to Geeta Jethani.
While awarding the compensation, the commission had criticized the cussed attitude of AAI in questioning the compensation for a death which clearly resulted from its apathy, saying the case pointed to the extent “we have developed the tendency to deny the obvious, in litigation”. “Except admitting the trapping of a young child in the escalator, the AAI has tried to dispute its liability and deficiency in service. We do not know when we will change our jurisprudence which encourages such attitude of denials and protracts litigation and increases burden on adjudicating forums/courts,” Justice M B Shah, chairman of the commission, had said in his verdict.

Read the rest of this entry »

Feb 01

Supreme Court rules on applying dowry act on gifts demand

The mixture of societal norms versus modern age greed makes for a potential minefield of customs. Given the prevalence of dowry in India, it is left for the courts to sort their way through this minefield. What makes the situation more complex is the prevalence of dowry as an abhorrent concept that can (and many times does) lead to harassment of the bride of the family, both verbally and physically as well as the increasing trend to use the harsh anti-dowry laws to threaten and get back at the husband’s family. Things are never simple. The classic definition of dowry is when money or equivalent is demanded from the bride and her family for the marriage or after. But what about the case when the husband’s family wants the bride’s family to give some gifts on the occasion of the birth of a child. If demanded, then it is abhorrent; but is it really dowry. It is part of the same get-money claim, but is not dowry. And that is what the Supreme Court has ruled:

The Supreme Court has ruled that demand for money and presents from parents of a married girl at the time of birth of her child or for other ceremonies, as is prevalent in society, may be deprecable but cannot be categorised as dowry to make it a punishable offence.
This means, if a daughter-in-law is being harassed for customary gifts by parents-in-law, then they could be booked under ordinary penal provisions but not under the tough anti-dowry laws providing stringent punishments.

Read the rest of this entry »