https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277337 A hirer and route-permit holder may be treated as the "owner" for compensation liability where it has actual possession and effective control of the vehicle. Because the bus was operated on the Corporation's route, fares were collected through its conductor, and the driver functioned under its control, the Court treated the Corporation as vicariously liable for the driver's tort committed in the course of operation. A contractual clause shifting liability to the registered owner did not defeat that responsibility, especially where the agreement contemplated reimbursement if the Corporation made payment. en-us Wed, 03 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Dec 2018 12:36:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277337 A hirer and route-permit holder may be treated as the "owner" for compensation liability where it has actual possession and effective control of the vehicle. Because the bus was operated on the Corporation's route, fares were collected through its conductor, and the driver functioned under its control, the Court treated the Corporation as vicariously liable for the driver's tort committed in the course of operation. A contractual clause shifting liability to the registered owner did not defeat that responsibility, especially where the agreement contemplated reimbursement if the Corporation made payment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 03 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277337