Rs 1 Lakh Compensation For Child Mauled By Stray Dogs, Noida RWA Held Liable
Rs 1 Lakh Compensation For Child Mauled By Stray Dogs, Noida RWA Held Liable Published By, Last Updated: July 17, 2026, 09:12 IST According to
Rs 1 Lakh Compensation For Child Mauled By Stray Dogs, Noida RWA Held Liable Published By, Last Updated: July 17, 2026, 09:12 IST According to the complaint, the child sustained a Category III dog bite on her back before a passerby rescued her. Rapid Read (Image for representation: PTI) A district consumer commission has directed the Residents’ Welfare Association (RWA) of Kendriya Vihar-II in Noida’s Sector 82 to pay Rs 1 lakh in compensation to a resident after holding it accountable for failing to address the stray dog menace that resulted in a four-year-old girl being attacked inside the housing society. In its July 10 order, the commission held that an RWA that collects maintenance and security charges cannot evade its responsibility to ensure the safety of residents in the residential complex. It described the lapse as a “deficiency in service", the Times of India reported. The bench, comprising president Anil Kumar Pundir and member Anju Sharma, allowed the complaint and directed the RWA, through its president, to pay Rs 1 lakh towards the child’s mental agony, harassment, injuries and the risk suffered, along with Rs 5,000 as litigation costs.
The commission said the amount must be paid within 30 days, failing which it will accrue simple interest at 6% per annum until payment is made. The commission, however, dismissed a separate complaint filed against the Noida Authority over the issue of stray dogs. The complaint was filed by resident Ashish Kumar Aggarwal, who said his four-year-old daughter, Shayra, was attacked by a pack of stray dogs in the green park behind the RWA office at around 9.20 pm on June 29, 2022. According to the complaint, the child sustained a Category III dog bite on her back before a passerby rescued her, TOI reported. Aggarwal argued that the incident was not isolated and claimed residents had repeatedly informed the RWA about the increasing stray dog menace after several people were bitten earlier. He also submitted that, since he had been paying maintenance and security charges since 2005, he qualified as a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act and was entitled to safe maintenance services. Rejecting the RWA’s defence, the commission observed, “The RWA has failed to discharge its obligation to provide safe and adequate maintenance and security services to the residents, which amounts to deficiency of service under the Consumer Protection Act." During the proceedings, the Noida Authority maintained that the responsibility for managing stray dogs within the housing society rested with the RWA because it collected maintenance charges.
The BriefWire