Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.19 seconds)
Government Of Kerala vs Jolly Saimon on 28 February, 2005 cites

The State Of Rajasthan vs Mst. Vidhyawati And Another on 2 February, 1962

In The State of Rajasthan (supra), it was further pointed out that in England, the crown was no longer immune from proceedings in court in regard to the tortious acts of its servants, and that it was realised in the United Kingdom that the rule 'The King can do no wrong' had become outmoded and, therefore, the very citadel of the absolute rule of immunity of the sovereign has now been blown-up. It was further held that the State should be as much liable for tort in respect of a tortious act committed by its servant within the scope of his employment and function, as any other employer. The common law immunity that was prevailing in United Kingdom which was based on the old feudalistic notions of justice has never operated in India, and here the sovereign has been held liable to be sued in tort or in R.F.A.542/05 -:15:- contract. It was also held that, in an independent India, governed by a Constitution, there was no justification for upholding the principle of immunity which was based on an out- moded common law theory that no longer operated as such in the country of its birth.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 105 - B P Sinha - Full Document
1