Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: vicarious liability Page 1 of about 16,204 results (0.083 seconds)

Nov 25 1971 (HC)

Life Insurance Corporation of India and anr. Vs. Kasturben Naranbhai V ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1973Guj216

..... oza, it is true that the original owner opponent no.1 has been exonerated by the tribunal. without going into the question of vicarious liability, the act liability attaches even in this case in view of the driver's extension clause as the company is an insurer in this connection, therefore, even ..... the law had been development to implement the policy underlying vicarious liability, and motor vehicles were the prim a facie example. act motor vehicle is powerful engine of death and destruction. it was capable of doing ..... of any implied authority. lord denning in the subsequent case in lauchburry v. morgans, (1971) 1 all er 642 explains this doctrine of vicarious liability which was evolved by law for social justice reasons. the tribunal had of course to give reasons which commended themselves to the public at large. ..... cases laws drawn a presumption that a vehicle is driven on the master's business and by his authorised agent or servant so that this vicarious liability on social justice principles could always be invoked unless the presumption was rebutted. in the case before their lordship the majority view was that ..... itself the insurance company would by-law eligible as in the other case.9. besides, in the present case, even at common law, the vicarious liability of the owner of the vehicle would be clearly attracted. in sitaram v. santnuprasad, air 1966 sc 1697, their lordships have sleeted the law .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 03 2009 (HC)

R.S. Sodhi and anr. and Vs. Partha Pratim Saikia

Court : Guwahati

Reported in : [2009]151CompCas583(Gauhati)

..... in this regard, notice that the provisions of the essential commodities act, 1955, negotiable instruments act, 1881, employees' provident funds miscellaneous provisions act, 1952, etc., have created such vicarious liability. it is interesting to note that section 14a of the 1952 act specifically creates an offence of criminal breach of trust in respect of the amount deducted from the employees ..... in which neither of these solutions is satisfactory ; in which case, the court considers that the law was intended to apply to companies and that, although it excludes ordinary vicarious liability, insistence on the primary rules of attribution would, in practice, defeat that intention. in such a case, the court must fashion a special rule of attribution for the ..... global funds management asia ltd. (supra), as follows (page 419 of [1995] 3 wlr):the company's primary rules of attribution together with the general principles of agency, vicarious liability and so forth are usually sufficient to enable one to determine its rights and obligations. in exceptional cases, however, they will not provide an answer. this will be the ..... ship's boilers, cargo had been destroyed by fire caused by the ship's boiler. the statutory provisions, which were, in question, namely, section 2, excluded application of vicarious liability and the provisions, contained in section 502, were such as would apply only to an individual owner. notwithstanding the fact that section 502 appeared to involve an individual owner, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 2008 (HC)

Manish Kant Aggarwal Vs. National Agriculatural Cooperative Marketing ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 156(2009)DLT415

..... the conduct and affairs of the business of the company would arise only when the company itself is the drawer of such dishonoured cheques and then only vicarious liability of the company would shift on such directors and other functionaries of company, otherwise not. therefore, the argument of the counsel for the respondent has ..... the payment within 15 days of the receipt of the said notice. if the person committing an offence under section 138 is a company, then vicarious liability is fastened on certain other persons as well.16. a plain reading of section 138 n.i. act clearly shows that a complaint petition is ..... case where the offence is committed by a company, the drawer of the cheque necessarily has to be the company itself and it is only thereafter vicarious liability of any of the director or other principal officer subject to fulfillment of the requirement of section 141 of the n.i. act can be ..... the offence was an incharge and responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company as well as the company, the vicarious liability has been fastened on such person. the argument of the counsel for the petitioner is that for making any director or officer of the company ..... face criminal prosecution under section 138 n.i. act as envisaged under section 141 of the act. the other contention raised in these petitions that vicarious liability of the director or any other officer of the company can be fastened only in a case where the drawer of the cheque is company itself .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 07 1999 (HC)

Orient Syntex Limited and Others Vs. Besant Capital Tech Limited

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2000(5)BomCR345; [2001]104CompCas669(Bom); 2000CriLJ210

..... in sub-section (1) of section 141 of the ni act.26. in the case of stale of haryana v. brij lal mittal & others, : 1998crilj3287 , the apex court, while considering the vicarious liability for offence committed by companies held as under :---'8. nonetheless, we find that the impugned judgment of the high court has got to be upheld for an altogether different reason ..... recalled, as there is no material against them to proceed with the case. as already submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the question requiring examination is about the vicarious liability of the directors of the company; so this court need not take into consideration the other grounds raised by the accused persons in their application.25. at least, there can ..... the ni act shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and published accordingly.20. mr. dharmadhikari submitted that in case of vicarious liability of the directors of the company and their prosecution for having committed offence under section 138 of the ni act, our high court as well as various other high courts have ..... affairs of the sale and manufacture of the disputed sample. from the very nature of his duties, it can be safely inferred that the manager would undoubtedly be vicariously liable for the offence; vicarious liability being an incident of an offence under the act. mr. manohar submitted that the court went to observe that section 319 of criminal procedure code gives ample powers to any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 11 2008 (HC)

Sesa Goa Limited and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(111)BomLR261; [2009]151CompCas358(Bom); [2009]89SCL169(Bom)

..... corporate, vicarious liability of the managing director and the director would arise provided there exists a provision in that behalf in the statute. a similar view has been expressed by the supreme court ..... offences committed by the company. in maksud saiyed v. state of gujarat (supra), the supreme court has held that the indian penal code does not contain any provision for attaching vicarious liability on the part of the managing director or directors of the company when the accused is the company. it has been further held that since the bank is a body ..... . state of maharashtra air 1986 sc 439. the cases cited by the learned counsel for the respondent to buttress his submission that the directors are vicariously liable for offences committed by the company indicate that the vicarious liability was provided for in the relevant provisions of law applicable to those cases. therefore, in my view, the submission of the learned counsel for the ..... act cannot be accepted. as observed by the supreme court in maksud saiyed v. state of gujarat : (2008)5scc668 , the indian penal code does not contain any provisions for attaching vicarious liability on the part of the managing director or directors of a company when the accused is the company. it is only when a statute provides for fixing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 01 1985 (HC)

General Manager, Ksrtc Vs. Vijayalaxmi

Court : Karnataka

..... liable, and he and his master are joint-tort teasers, though in practice it is the master who is sued since he is better able to pay the damages. for vicarious liability to arise three things have to be established: a master-servant relationship ; that the servant committed a tort ; and that he did so in the course of his employment.'as ..... the second contention either.7. what remains to be considered is the contention that the non-joinder of the driver is fatal to the action. the owner's liability in this case is the vicarious liability of the master for the tortious act of the servant in the course of employment. they are both in the position of joint-tort teasers and their ..... while acting in the course of employment. this is by far the most important of the various cases in which vicarious responsibility or vicarious liability is recognised by the law. vicarious liability means that one person takes or supplies the place of another so far as liability is concerned........'in jones v. manchester corporation, (1952) o.b. 852 denning, l.j. said :'in all these cases ..... to a person by two or more wrongdoers they may either be joint-tort teasers or independent tort-feasors. a case of vicarious liability is a case of joint-tort teasers. on the question as to the nature of the vicarious liability of the master for the tortious act of the servant, salmond on 'torts' (18th edition, 1981) states :'a master is jointly and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 05 1971 (HC)

Shabbir Khan Vs. Mohd. Ismail Khan and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 1972CriLJ666

..... has taken the view that section 149 i. p. c. does not constitute a substantive offence and it was only an enabling section for imposition of vicarious liability ... in our opinion, the view taken by the high court is correct.' i may also refer to the following observations of their lordships of the ..... himself - by himself or along with others - had committed the offence of murder.18. section 149 i. p. c. no doubt provides for creating vicarious liability. that was the view taken by the supreme court also. however, the main ingredient of the charge under sections 149 i. p. c. against the ..... of the fact that offences punishable under sections 323 and 325 i. p. c. are compoundable. and section 149 i. p. c. creates only vicarious liability, a person charged under sections 323/149 and 325/149 i. p. c. should not, for the purposes of compounding those offences, be treated differently ..... any prosecution for such offence is pending. the offences punishable under sections 143 (being member of an unlawful assembly) 147 (rioting) and 149 (creating vicarious liability and amounting to the same offence as committed by any member of the unlawful assembly) are contained in chapter viii (offences, against public tranquillity) of ..... this court in the case of state of u. p. v. chandrapal singh 1968 cri lj 1342 (all). section 149 i. p. c. creates vicarious liability but does not create a distinct offence, and, therefore, an offence punishable under section 323/149 i. p. c. is compoundable in the same manner .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 2007 (SC)

Maksud Saiyed Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2008(1)CTC259; JT2007(11)SC276; 2008(11)SCALE318; (2008)5SCC668; (2008)2SCC(Cri)692

..... 200 of the code of criminal procedure, the magistrate is required to apply his mind. indian penal code does not contain any provision for attaching vicarious liability on the part of the managing director or the directors of the company when the accused is the company. the learned magistrate failed to pose ..... lead to the conclusion that the respondents herein were personally liable for any offence. the bank is a body corporate. vicarious liability of the managing director and director would arise provided any provision exists in that behalf in the statute. statutes indisputably must contain provision fixing such ..... the said purpose, it is obligatory on the part of the complainant to make requisite allegations which would attract the provisions constituting vicarious liability.14. it will bear repetition to state that throughout the complaint petition, no allegation had been made as against any of ..... the police, therefore following order is given.11. allegations contained in the complaint petition, as noticed by the learned magistrate, may give rise to tortuous liability on the part of dena bank. principal allegations were made against the bank. who had acted on behalf of the bank was not disclosed. the ..... into uncomfortable position. thus, there is no bonafide intention on the part of your client except to harass my client and to avoid your client's liability towards the repayment of the bank's dues.*** *** ***9. in view of the above, my client has not acted with malafide intention and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 13 2009 (HC)

Vasu Tech Limited and ors. Vs. Ratna Commercial Enterprises Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 160(2009)DLT591

..... irresistible conclusion under the facts and circumstances of this case which could be arrived at is that, the complaint contains specific averments involving petitioner nos. 2 to 4 for their vicarious liability for the act of petitioner company, for and on behalf of the company for having committed offence under section 138 of the n.i. act. the fact that petitioners had ..... statements made in the complaint against petitioner no. 3 as to how he was incharge of and responsible for the conduct of business of the company so as to put vicarious liability upon him under section 141 of the n.i. act. for that purpose relevant paragraphs of the complaint which contain averments against petitioner no. 3 beside other petitioners are reproduced ..... of the impugned cheques. therefore, i shall confine myself to the issue if petitioner nos. 2 and 3 can be fastened with vicarious liability under section 141 of the n.i. act when cheques issued by the petitioner company were dishonoured on presentation.18. admittedly, petitioner no. 2 is the managing director of petitioner ..... . : 2005crilj4140 ;(vii) n. rangachari v. bharat sanchar nigam ltd. : 2007crilj2448 .17. learned senior counsel for the petitioner, during the course of arguments, has confined his arguments to the issue of vicarious liability of petitioners no. 2 and 3 only. learned counsel has also conceded that he was not pressing the petitions on behalf of petitioner no. 4 as she was the signatory .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 12 1973 (HC)

Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1974)76BOMLR675

..... , it gives effect to the legal position as judicially pronounced. if the law materially attributed the act of the owner's agent or servant to the owner, it would create vicarious liability within recognised limits, but if section 115(2) is so construed that the owner becomes liable for the acts of the persons over whom he has no control or right ..... the vehicle sought to be confiscated can reasonably be expected to exercise control or supervision. mr. sorabjee contended that the liability of petitioner no. 1 to have its vehicle confiscated is a vicarious liability, the primary liability being1 of the driver himself, and this liability cannot arise if the driver was not legitimately in charge of the vehicle or the driver was not an employee ..... the innocence of or precautions taken by a person over whom he has no control. in my opinion, the doctrine of vicarious liability for criminal or tortious acts of others cannot be introduced in the interpretation of section 115(2). the liability of a vehicle to confiscation must be determined on the plain words of the section itself, unless it violates a fundamental ..... that normally and naturally the person who is liable for wrong is he who does it. the modern civil law recognises vicarious liability. for example, master is responsible for the acts of his servants done in the course of their employment. the liability of the master for the acts of the servant has its origin in the legal presumption, that all acts done .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //