AREA: VICARIOUS LIABILITY OF STATE
FACTS:
The incident occurred in 1955 when a government jeep, driven by an official, hit a young boy who was crossing the road. The boy died as a result of the accident, and his mother, Ms. Vidhyawati, filed a suit against the State of Rajasthan, seeking compensation for the loss of her son. The state government argued that the driver was not acting in the course of his employment when the accident occurred and therefore the government could not be held liable for his actions. The lower court held in favor of the government, but the decision was reversed on appeal to the High Court of Rajasthan. The state government then appealed to the Supreme Court of India.
ISSUES:
Whether the state government was vicariously liable for the tortuous acts of its employee?
JUDGMENT:
The Supreme Court of India held that the state government was vicariously liable for the tortuous acts of its employees, including the driver in this case. The court held that the driver was acting within the scope of his employment when the accident occurred, and therefore the state government was responsible for his actions. The court also held that the state was not protected by the doctrine of sovereign immunity in cases like this, as it had waived its immunity by setting up a statutory authority to deal with claims of this kind.
Comentários