{"id":253253,"date":"2021-08-26T13:00:00","date_gmt":"2021-08-26T07:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=253253"},"modified":"2021-09-03T11:03:32","modified_gmt":"2021-09-03T05:33:32","slug":"100-permanent-disability","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/","title":{"rendered":"Due to employer\u2019s negligence, an employee suffered 100% disability | Read how Del HC emphasises on principle of res ipsa loquitur and strict liability to pronounce decision"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Delhi High Court: <\/strong>Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J., emphasizing the principle of res ipsa loquitur and placing a detailed explanation on the same granted just and fair compensation to a person who was 100% disabled due to an accident at his place of work.<\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Factual Backdrop<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Petitioner\u2019s son (Bharat) who was 28 years of age was the victim of an accident at the age of about 21 years which had left him 100% disabled. Instant petition was filed by petitioner\u2019s father since petitioner was stated to be virtually bed ridden and not in a position to file to pursue his claim against the respondents.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Petitioner had made claims against the respondents BSES Rajdhani Power Limited and Bryn Construction Company.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Further, it was submitted that petitioner had suffered an accident due to certain work performed by Bryn for BRPL, which led to the filing of the present petition.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><em>Cause of Permanent Disability<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em>\u00a0<\/em>Bharat, who was then about 21 years of age, while working as an electrician with Bryn, was tasked with rectifying a fault in an electricity pole that was causing fluctuation in the electricity supply at a farmhouse and suffered a fall while performing the task since the electricity pole that he had climbed on, snapped and fell.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bharat&#8217;s dismal physical state apart, it was also evident to this court that Bharat was a psychological wreck, not least because in the course of interaction with this court, he broke- down on several occasions.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><em>Depression and Anxiety<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em>\u00a0<\/em>As per medical opinion in regard to Bharat\u2019s psychological state, his level of mental depression and anxiety fall in the \u201cabnormal range\u201d.<\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Questions for Consideration<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>Given his medical condition, what course of action should be adopted for Bharat\u2019s further rehabilitation, continuing care and welfare?<\/li>\n<li>Is Bharat entitled to receive any monetary compensation for the injury suffered by him as a result of the accident; if so, from which of the respondent or respondents?<\/li>\n<li>If the answer to (ii) above is in the affirmative, in what manner should the compensation be calculated?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">Analysis, Law and Decision<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">While analyzing and penning down this interesting decision, Court addressed a very fundamental issue, whether Bharat was an \u2018employee\u2019 of Bryn or was engaged by Bryn to perform the task that led to the accident.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It was noted that Bryn did not expressly admit that Bharat was their employee; nor that he had been engaged by them to perform the task in question.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">However, there was also no denial of any kind, whether express or implied, that Bharat was working for Bryn. The thrust of Bryn\u2019s counter-affidavit is that BRPL is responsible to compensate Bharat for the injury, since at the relevant time Bharat was working under BRPL\u2019s supervision and performing BRPL\u2019s tasks.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Court took note of the fact that while BRPL and Bryn both contended that all requisite safety equipment and precaution were made available by them, neither BRPL nor Bryn explained why such equipment, if available, failed to protect Bharat from the serious injury he suffered.<strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><em>Opinion of the Court<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bench opined that Bharat was working for Bryn and was tasked with certain maintenance work to be performed on an electricity pole owned by BRPL; which pole, it turned-out, was not strong enough to take Bharat\u2019s weight or was not rooted securely in the ground, and thereby fell, as a result of which Bharat sustained serious injuries. It is also evident that Bharat was not provided any safety gear before he was directed to climb the pole to undertake the task.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><em>\u00a0Principle of res ipsa loquitur<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">High Court added to its analysis that the instant matter would be squarely covered by the principle of <em>res ipsa loquitur<\/em>, whereby no detailed evidence, much less a trial, is required to establish ex-facie negligence on the part of BRPL and Bryn.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The said maxim was lucidly explained in the leading Supreme Court decision of <em>Shyam Sundar v. State of Rajasthan, <\/em>(1974) 1 SCC 690,<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><em>The maxim res ipsa loquitur is resorted to when an accident is shown to have occurred and the cause of the accident is primarily within the knowledge of the defendant. The mere fact that the cause of the accident is unknown does not prevent the plaintiff from recovering the damages, if the proper inference to be drawn from the circumstances which are known is that it was caused by the negligence of the defendant.<\/em><em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Elaborating further, the Court stated that the accident could not have occurred had Bryn and\/or BRPL not been negligent in taking reasonable precautions to avoid it; which gave rise to their strict liability for the injuries sustained by Bharat.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The undated declaration with no proof of payment made to Bharat, though the declaration signed by Bryn accepting payment of a small sum of compensation in full and final settlement from Bryn and absolving them of any further liability.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In Court\u2019s view, the above-mentioned declaration, deserved no credence or value since it smacked of being a document procured by Bryn <em>precisely for the purpose of absolving itself of<\/em> any further claim or liability <em>vis-\u00e0-vis <\/em>Bharat, by suborning a hapless and resourceless victim with a small amount of monetary bait, knowing full well that their actual liability would be much more.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bench further expressed that merely because there were more than one respondent attempting to foist blame or liability on each other, that would not defeat the just claim of the petitioner\u2019s son.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hence, both respondents would be held jointly and severally liable, giving them liberty to recover the whole or any part of compensation paid, from one another.<\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">High Court\u2019s Inference<\/span><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>Without delving into the technical semantics of whether Bharat was an \u2018employee\u2019 of Bryn within the meaning of the Employee\u2019s Compensation Act, suffice it to say that Bharat was performing the task in question for Bryn and at their instance<\/li>\n<li>Bharat is unable to perform even the most basic, personal, daily chores himself and is all but 100% dependent on others; and as a result, though Bharat is living, he is barely alive;<\/li>\n<li>On the principle of \u2018strict liability\u2019, both Bryn and BRPL are, jointly and severally, liable to compensate Bharat for putting him in his current state;<\/li>\n<li>Section 4(2)(a) of the Employee\u2019s Compensation Act mandates that apart from the liability to pay compensation, the employer is also under obligation to reimburse all actual medical expenses incurred by an employee for treatment of injuries. Furthermore, section 4-A provides that failure of an employer to pay compensation in a timely manner would attract payment of both interest and penalty for the delayed payment of compensation;<\/li>\n<li>Reading the Bryn-BRPL Agreement and section 12 of the Employee\u2019s Compensation Act together, it is seen that section 12 also fixes liability upon the \u201cprincipal\u201d for payment of compensation to an injured employee, with a right in the principal to recover the same from the contractor, if work was being carried-out by a contractor. In the present case the principal would therefore be BRPL and the contractor would be Bryn<\/li>\n<li>Allowing the petition, Court awarded Bharat relief in two broad categories:<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ol style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>Monetary Relief<\/li>\n<li>Non-Monetary Relief by way of directions.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Details of the relief can be referred to in the Judgment.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In view of the above discussion, petition was disposed of. [Kehar Sigh v. GNCTD, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/D49T57l5\"><b>2021 SCC OnLine Del 4198<\/b><\/a>, decided on 25-08-2021]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\">Advocates before the Court:<\/span><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #800080;\">For the Petitioner:<\/span><\/strong> Prabhsahay Kaur, Amicus Curiae.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Saraswati Thakur, Advocate.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #800080;\"><strong>For the Respondents:<\/strong><\/span> Satyakam, Additional Standing Counsel for GNCTD\/R1<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ravi Gupta, Senior Counsel with Sunil Fernandes, Standing Counsel for BRPL-RPL with Anju Thomas, Shubham Sharma and Sachin Jain, Advocates for R2.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A.K. Sharma, Advocate for R3. Saurabh Sharma, Advocate for Indian Spinal Injuries Centre.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Sayli Petiwale, Advocate for Anil Mittal, Advocate for State of U.P.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court: Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J., emphasizing the principle of res ipsa loquitur and placing a detailed explanation on the same <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[46842,2735,2728,2543,46845,30651,46843,31857,29785,3301,29404,3065,46846,46844],"class_list":["post-253253","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-100-permanent-disability","tag-Accident","tag-compensation","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-depression-and-anxiety","tag-employee","tag-employee-compensation","tag-employer","tag-law","tag-liability","tag-monetary-relief","tag-negligence","tag-non-monetary-relief","tag-res-ipsa-loquitur"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Due to employer\u2019s negligence, an employee suffered 100% disability | Read how Del HC emphasises on principle of res ipsa loquitur and strict liability to pronounce decision | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"100% Permanent Disability\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Due to employer\u2019s negligence, an employee suffered 100% disability | Read how Del HC emphasises on principle of res ipsa loquitur and strict liability to pronounce decision\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"100% Permanent Disability\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-08-26T07:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-09-03T05:33:32+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1329\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/\",\"name\":\"Due to employer\u2019s negligence, an employee suffered 100% disability | Read how Del HC emphasises on principle of res ipsa loquitur and strict liability to pronounce decision | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-08-26T07:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-09-03T05:33:32+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"100% Permanent Disability\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Due to employer\u2019s negligence, an employee suffered 100% disability | Read how Del HC emphasises on principle of res ipsa loquitur and strict liability to pronounce decision\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Due to employer\u2019s negligence, an employee suffered 100% disability | Read how Del HC emphasises on principle of res ipsa loquitur and strict liability to pronounce decision | SCC Times","description":"100% Permanent Disability","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Due to employer\u2019s negligence, an employee suffered 100% disability | Read how Del HC emphasises on principle of res ipsa loquitur and strict liability to pronounce decision","og_description":"100% Permanent Disability","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-08-26T07:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-09-03T05:33:32+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1329,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/","name":"Due to employer\u2019s negligence, an employee suffered 100% disability | Read how Del HC emphasises on principle of res ipsa loquitur and strict liability to pronounce decision | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-08-26T07:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2021-09-03T05:33:32+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"100% Permanent Disability","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/100-permanent-disability\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Due to employer\u2019s negligence, an employee suffered 100% disability | Read how Del HC emphasises on principle of res ipsa loquitur and strict liability to pronounce decision"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":330458,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/10\/delhi-hc-directs-bses-to-pay-1000000-compensation-to-wife-of-sub-inspector-who-died-due-to-electrocution\/","url_meta":{"origin":253253,"position":0},"title":"Delhi High Court directs BSES to pay Rs. 10,00,000\/- as compensation to wife of Sub-Inspector who died due to electrocution","author":"Editor","date":"September 10, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u2018If the State fails to adhere to the practical necessity of preserving human life, it leads to a tragic loss of human dignity.\u2019","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":333324,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/10\/18\/dhc-directs-bses-to-pay-ex-gratia-amount-rs10-lakh-to-parents-of-18-year-old-boy-who-died-due-to-electrocution\/","url_meta":{"origin":253253,"position":1},"title":"Delhi HC directs BSES Yamuna Power Ltd to pay ex-gratia amount of Rs. 10 lakhs to parents of 18-year-old boy who died due to electrocution from non-insulated live electric line","author":"Arushi","date":"October 18, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"In the present case, a call was made to the police station informing that a person was lying in an unconscious state due to electric shock. The post-mortem report also mentioned the cause of death as ante-mortem electrocution. Therefore, it is an undisputed fact that the deceased died due to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":300800,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/05\/principle-of-resipsaloquitur-in-stricto-sensu-shall-not-apply-to-cases-falling-under-section-304-a-ipc-uttaranchal-hc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":253253,"position":2},"title":"Principle of res ipsa loquitur in stricto sensu shall not apply to cases falling under Section 304-A of Penal Code, 1860: Uttaranchal High Court","author":"Simranjeet","date":"September 5, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe res ipsa loquitur is applicable in a civil action under the tort and the same cannot be pressed into service in a criminal case to prove negligence.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"uttaranchal high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/uttaranchal-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/uttaranchal-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/uttaranchal-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/uttaranchal-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":254109,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/13\/medical-negligence-3\/","url_meta":{"origin":253253,"position":3},"title":"Mere legal principles not sufficient in medical negligence cases: SC absolves doctor and hospital of liability for medical negligence","author":"Editor","date":"September 13, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: A Division Bench comprising of Hemant Gupta and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. absolved a doctor and a hospital of liability for medical negligence. The Supreme Court said that failure of treatment cannot automatically make the medical professional liable for medical negligence. It was observed: \"Every death of a patient\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":279475,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/12\/12\/signboard-of-bank-of-baroda-falling-on-the-head-of-a-passerby-resulting-in-his-death-is-negligence-by-the-bank-delhi-high-court-directs-compensation-to-the-deceased\/","url_meta":{"origin":253253,"position":4},"title":"Signboard of Bank of Baroda falling on the head of a passerby resulting in his death is negligence by the bank; Delhi High Court directs compensation to the deceased","author":"Editor","date":"December 12, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"A signboard coming off the fa\u00e7ade of the building was a foreseeable event given the fact that Delhi experiences high-velocity winds, in May, each year.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bank of Baroda","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image90.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":239938,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/30\/all-hc-whether-res-judicata-will-apply-where-issue-of-negligence-already-decided-by-competent-tribunal-in-claim-arising-out-of-same-accident-court-examines\/","url_meta":{"origin":253253,"position":5},"title":"All HC | Whether res judicata will apply where issue of negligence already decided by competent Tribunal in claim arising out of same accident? Court examines","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 30, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court:\u00a0Dr Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J., while addressing the matter observed that: \"...where there are multiple claims, MACT should place all the matters before the same Tribunal and the same tribunal should consolidate the matter and decide the same.\"\u00a0 The instant appeal was at the behest of the claimants\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/253253","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=253253"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/253253\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=253253"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=253253"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=253253"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}