PARO Vs. PREM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prabh Dial Singh, a cloth merchant while travelling on his motor cycle was knocked down and killed in an accident with a tractor. This happened at Cheehartha, Amritsar on July 7, 1976. The Tribunal found the negligence of Prem Singh, the driver of the tractor, as the cause of the accident, and awarded a sum of Rs. 68,600/- as compensation to the claimants, they being the widow and two minor children of the deceased. The tractor had not been insured and so it was only the said Prem Singh and Smt. Paro, the owner thereof who were held liable for the payment of the amount awarded.

(2.) In appeal now by Smt. Paro, the owner of the tractor, the plea sought to be raised was that she could not be held vicariously liable for the accident, as Prem Singh was not her employee and at any rate the accident had not been caused by him in the course of his employment with her.

(3.) The tractor admittedly belonged to Smt. Paro and it stands established from the evidence on record that it was being driven by Prem Singh when the accident took place. Neither Prem Singh nor any other witness was examined to contest the claim of the claimants. In a situation like the present, it has clearly to be presumed that the tractor was being driven by Prem Singh for and on behalf of its owner. This is of course a rebuttable presumption, but here neither the driver nor the owner chose to come into the witness-box or to adduce any other evidence and this presumption must consequently stand. The legal position being so, is founded upon the judgment of this Court in Joginder Nath v. Shanti Devi, 1967 Acc. C. J. 150. This being the state of affairs in this case, there is no escape from the conclusion, having regard also to the evidence on record, that not only Prem Singh, but also Smt. Paro were rightly held liable by the Tribunal for the amount awarded.