difficulty in holding that the State should be as much liable for tort in respect of a tortious act committed by its servant within ... India Company, the sovereign has been held liable to be sued in tort or in contract, and the Common Law immunity never operated in India
otherwise point to his negligence. (See John G. Fleming. The Law of Torts, 4th ed. p.264). The mere happening of the accident ... Lindsell, Fifteenth Edition, Chapter 10-112 page 485 on the Law of Torts it is stated as follows:
"It is only a convenient lable
A.Pavadai vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 6 February, 2014
Author: S.Manikumar
Bench
judgment wherein, the Apex Court has explained the distinction between a tort and crime, where negligence is the fact, required to be proved ... Apex Court has drawn the distinction between criminal negligence and negligence in tort;- a civil liability.
(i) In Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab reported
down and sustained injuries. They further contended that the deceased, being a tort-feasor, his legal representatives are not entitled to claim any compensation. Without ... deceased, so as to bring the deceased under the term of tort-feasor. The legal representatives on the quantum of award have claimed that
These provisions are in consonance with the principles of law of torts that every injury must have a remedy. It is for the Motor Vehicles
case involving an accident is within the realm of law of torts. It is based on the principle of restitutio in integrum. The said principle
case involving an accident is within the realm of law of torts. It is based on the principle of restitutio in integrum. The said principle
these cases 'should be such as to enable even a tort feasor to say that he had amply atoned for his misadventure
These provisions are in consonance with the principles of law of torts that every injury must have a remedy. It is for the Motor Vehicles
