Browse by Stream
QnA
Home
QnA
Go To Your Study Dashboard

Get Answers to all your Questions

header-bg qa
  • Home
  • Law
  • Read the passage and answer the question  In National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sivasankara Pillai (1995 (1) KLT 51), it was held that the Tribunal is required to make a

Read the passage and answer the question

 In National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sivasankara Pillai (1995 (1) KLT 51), it was held that the Tribunal is required to make an apportionment of compensation awarded against each of the owners of the vehicle in proportion to the negligence of respective drivers. It was also held that when two vehicles are involved, and an accident happens due to the negligence of both drivers, they are not joint tortfeasors. Earlier decisions in 1988 (2) KLT 871 and 1989 (2) KLT 227 were also explained and distinguished as, in this case, arguments were placed by both sides as both parties are joint tortfeasors. But, there are several tortfeasors. In the case decided in 1993 (2) KLT 777, only the driver was not implemented. But, the owner was impeached. The owner is liable for the liability only to the extent of negligence of the driver. Therefore, the driver and owner of the same vehicle are joint tortfeasors. The owner and driver of another vehicle involved in the accident can only be one of the several tortfeasors. If two vehicles are involved and only if one vehicle's driver and owner are made parties, no liability can be cast on the other party directly or indirectly without implementing them. If he was made a party, he would have got an opportunity that he is not at all responsible for the accident or amount claimed is high. In this case, the accident occurred on 19-10-1992. 13 years have passed. Driver, owner, and insurance company are not parties.

The Tribunal held that the liability of the bus driver is 50%. If the contention of the appellant is accepted, the insurance company can be directed to deposit the entire amount and recover 50% of the amount from the owner of the lorry. If it is done, the liability will be mulcted on them without affording them an opportunity to defend their case. Even if notice is issued at this distance of time, it may not be possible for the owner of the lorry to remember who was the driver at that time and to find out his address. He also may not remember who is the insurer of the lorry at that time. He may not also be able to produce any evidence at this distance of time by citing witnesses to prove negligence. Records also may not be available in the police station after about more than 13 years. The bus driver, owner, and insurer were made as parties. After considering the evidence, the bus driver (R2) was found to be 50% negligent, and the owner of the bus, being vicariously liable, was also made liable for paying 50% of the compensation granted jointly and severally being joint tortfeasors and insurance company was directed to indemnify it.

 Question

On the occasion of Diwali, P and Q brought fire-crackers to celebrate. In the evening, a few other members residing in the locality also joined P and Q to celebrate Diwali together. P and Q started to fire the crackers as a part of the celebration. However, they were negligent in firing crackers which could hurt others. Meanwhile, due to crackers fired by P and Q, the cracker went straight inside another building, and the woman residing in that building sustained severe burns. Determine the liability of P and Q.

 

Option: 1

P and Q are not liable jointly

 


Option: 2

 P and Q are not liable severally

 


Option: 3

P and Q are liable jointly and severally

 


Option: 4

P is liable for causing injury to the woman by the fire-crackers

 


Answers (1)

best_answer

The principle of joint liability is joint and not several. In this case, due to the rash and negligent Act of both P and Q, the woman sustained severe burns. Therefore, the woman has a choice to hold either P or Q or both of them liable for the Act. Each one of them can make full payment of compensation to the woman.

Hence c) is the right answer.

 

Posted by

Pankaj

View full answer

Similar Questions

Trending Articles/News

anam-khan

CLAT 2025 counselling delayed: Consortium of NLUs to approach SC seeking relief against Delhi HC order
anam-khan

CLAT 2025 Result: Delhi HC refuses to intervene in order for revision
anam-khan

CLAT 2025 results likely to be revised; Delhi high court orders revision of merit list

Latest Question