Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
India decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Supreme Court upheld negligence findings against the truck driver, refused further enhancement for loss of dependency, but added filial consortium to the parents.
The Supreme Court held that the NCDRC erred in finding negligence because the complainants adduced no evidence that the doctor lacked requisite skill or failed to exercise it; the doctor was qualified, experienced, and followed accepted practice (Bolam test); mere deterioration or failure of surgery does not establish negligence or permit application of res ipsa loquitur without evidence of breach, and therefore the NCDRC's award was set aside and the State Commission's finding (dismissing the complaint) was restored (paras 16-20).
Source excerpt
The High Court's order quashing the final report was set aside because the High Court reached and relied upon findings of fact (including applying res ipsa loquitur and attributing rash and negligent driving) which were unnecessary for deciding the correctness of the final report under Section 482 CrPC; claim petitions for compensation must be decided on their own merits with liability established on the preponderance of probabilities by the claimants.
Source excerpt
The High Court correctly increased the compensation by applying a multiplier of 13 instead of 9 after finding on scientific evidence that the deceased's age was 50 (not 60), awarded amounts towards future prospects, and increased the rate of interest to 7.5%; the Supreme Court upheld the High Court order and dismissed the appeal.
Source excerpt
The Court held that public law remedies under Article 32 are available for vindication of Article 21 where life and personal liberty are violated; the organizers of the exhibition (Respondents 10-12) were primarily negligent and liable to pay compensation and cannot absolve themselves by blaming the contractor; the one-man Court Commission appointed under this Court's jurisdiction (Article 142) was valid for fact-finding and its report apportioning liability (Organizers 60%, State 40%) is accepted; remitted computation of compensation to a District Judge/Additional District Judge at Meerut to…
Source excerpt
Excise duty became exigible upon production/distillation of the liquor (taxable event is manufacture/production); Rule 7(11) (1% allowance) and Rule 709 (distillers liable for loss due to negligence) apply to bottled IMFL; the fire was not an act of God and, on the facts and reports (indications of electrical fault, old wiring/roof, firefighting observations) the loss was attributable to negligence of the licencee; insurance of liquor value without insuring excise duty reinforces negligence; accordingly the demand for excise duty was authorised by law and recovery was rightful, so the High Co…
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that the High Court correctly found sole negligence of the driver of the Eicher van based on categorical eyewitness evidence (PW-1 and PW-3) and in absence of any rebuttal evidence by the Eicher van driver; when tribunal evidence contradicts the FIR, the tribunal evidence prevails; the High Court correctly assessed the deceased's annual income from Form-16 as Rs.12,29,949 and properly applied future prospects and the multiplier in accordance with Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi, therefore the High Court's enhanced compensation award was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Bank was guilty of a deficiency of service by failing to forward the application form and to deduct and remit the insurance premium, resulting in no insurance cover and repudiation by the insurer; concurrent findings by the District Forum, State Commission and NCDRC support liability, and the appropriate compensation is Rs 5 lakhs, which the Supreme Court restored.
Source excerpt
A hotel, when it actively undertakes to park a guest's vehicle through valet parking, establishes a bailor-bailee relationship. The hotel is liable as bailee to return the vehicle in the condition delivered, subject to the standard of reasonable care under Sections 151 and 152 of the Contract Act, 1872. Strict liability is not applicable; prima facie negligence is the rule. The hotel cannot use exemption clauses to avoid liability for its negligence. The insurer, as subrogee along with the original owner, can maintain the consumer complaint. The hotel's failure to return the vehicle and lack…
Source excerpt
The appellant hotel breached its duty of care by assigning the lifeguard also to bartending duties, leading to a failure to provide necessary supervision at the swimming pool, which directly resulted in the death of the guest. The compensation assessed by the NCDRC at Rs. 62,50,000/- was justified, with interest awarded from the date of institution of the consumer complaint.
Source excerpt
Explore more
