https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172338 Concurrent findings that a bus driver acted rashly and negligently, with the owner vicariously liable, were not disturbed under Article 136 in a motor accident compensation claim. The Court held that an acquittal in the criminal case did not defeat civil liability, because culpable rashness under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code is a stricter standard than negligence in tort. It also recognised that negligence may be inferred from surrounding circumstances, including res ipsa loquitur, and stressed that accident claim tribunals should avoid undue technicality and secure fair compensation expeditiously. en-us Fri, 21 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Aug 2015 14:48:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172338 Concurrent findings that a bus driver acted rashly and negligently, with the owner vicariously liable, were not disturbed under Article 136 in a motor accident compensation claim. The Court held that an acquittal in the criminal case did not defeat civil liability, because culpable rashness under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code is a stricter standard than negligence in tort. It also recognised that negligence may be inferred from surrounding circumstances, including res ipsa loquitur, and stressed that accident claim tribunals should avoid undue technicality and secure fair compensation expeditiously. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 21 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172338