1984 riots: Delhi HC dismisses victim's compensation claim
The Delhi high court has upheld a single-judge order dismissing the plea of a 1984 anti-Sikh riots victim who was seeking enhanced compensation on claims of loss of property and injuries suffered by his wife.chandigarh Updated: May 20, 2014 20:12 IST
The Delhi high court has upheld a single-judge order dismissing the plea of a 1984 anti-Sikh riots victim who was seeking enhanced compensation on claims of loss of property and injuries suffered by his wife.
A division bench of chief justice G Rohini and justice RS Endlaw rejected the plea filed by Megh Singh, saying that he had been unable to substantiate his claim that he received compensation of Rs 2,000 by cheque from the Delhi government as a riot victim.
"The most vital thing for the appellant to have proved was receiving compensation as a victim of the riots. Though the appellant claims to have received Rs 2,000 by cheque, he has been unable to prove the same. We have perused the documents filed by the appellant... the said medical certificate nowhere advances the case of the appellant, of his wife having suffered grievous injury in the riots. Else, there is nothing else to suggest (the same). There is also no document to show loss of any property of the appellant," the court said.
By terming it 'vague', the court also rejected the petitioner's submission on delay in filing of the plea due to his illiteracy, poverty and old age.
Earlier, a single-judge bench of justice Manmohan had on January 29 had dismissed Megh Singh's plea for compensation, saying that he was unable to produce any documents in support of his claim.
According to Megh Singh, he ran a coal depot which was burnt and looted by rioters, and his wife Parkash Kaur was seriously injured in the attack.
Later, he approached the Municipal Corporation of Delhi with details of the loss of his property, upon which his wife received a cheque for Rs 2,000 as initial ex gratia compensation in January 1985, he claimed.
Megh Singh had also filed a case before the screening committee of the Delhi government in 2004, which was rejected.