7 dead in Satya Niketan tragedy: Hostel agreement said ‘not responsible’ for casualties or risk | Delhi News
NEW DELHI: An alleged PG agreement signed for the very Satya Niketan building that collapsed, killing seven people, stated that the hostel would not be responsible for any casualties and would not pay compensation for injuries or damage to tenants’ belongings in cases including fire, heavy rain, earthquakes and sealing of the premises, according to a copy of the agreement.The agreement states: “In case of any personal injury suffered / loss / damage of personal belongings of the tenant due to reasons beyond the control of the P.G. vize sealing/fire/earthquake/heavy rains /other natural calamities etc., the hostel will not be liable for paying any compensation.”The document also states: “PG authorities are not responsible for any casualties to tenants.”
PG agreement
The clauses in the alleged agreement signed by occupants of the Satya Niketan property have assumed significance following the building collapse and the scrutiny now being faced by PGs operating from residential buildings in the capital.
‘Hostel will not be liable for paying compensation’
The alleged agreement specifically lists circumstances in which the hostel says it would not be liable for compensation, including sealing, fire, earthquake and heavy rains, as well as other natural calamities.It covers personal injury, loss and damage to tenants’ belongings.The document also refers to reasons “beyond the control” of the PG while excluding the hostel from liability in the situations mentioned in the clause.The legal enforceability of such a clause would depend on the facts of the case and applicable law, but the wording of the agreement raises questions about the extent to which responsibility for tenant safety was sought to be excluded through contractual terms.
Clause comes under lens after Satya Niketan collapse
The agreement has come to light after the five-storey building housing the PG collapsed in Satya Niketan, near Delhi University’s South Campus, leaving seven people dead and several others injured.The collapse has triggered scrutiny of the building’s construction, its use as a PG and the role of civic authorities in permitting or monitoring such establishments.Locals had alleged that repair work was being carried out in the basement and that water had accumulated there following days of rain. Civic officials said they could not confirm whether such work was underway until the debris was cleared.The MCD had earlier flagged the collapsed structure as an unauthorised G+4 building in a resettlement colony where permission had been granted only for a G+1 structure.
PG safety, accountability under scrutiny
The Satya Niketan tragedy has renewed questions over the safety of private PGs and hostels, particularly those operating from old residential buildings.The Delhi High Court has also expressed concern over the safety of students living in PGs and private hostels and questioned the regulatory framework governing such establishments.The court has directed the MCD to conduct an audit of PGs and hostels and sought details from Delhi University on outstation students and available hostel facilities, noting that inadequate hostel capacity forces many students to depend on private PG accommodation.The agreement from the collapsed Satya Niketan building adds another dimension to the scrutiny — the terms on which students were housed in the property and the extent of responsibility that the operator sought to assume for their safety.The incident has now prompted wider questions over building safety, structural compliance, regulation of PGs and accountability for establishments housing large numbers of students.
