THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, NORTHEAST K.R.T.C. versus DEVIDAS MANIKRAO SADANANDA

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 284 · Decided: 15-09-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, NORTHEAST K.R.T.C. 
\: 
DEVIDAS MANIKRAO SADANANDA 
SEPTEMBER 15. 2006 
[ARIJIT PASAYAT AND S.H. KAPADIA, JJ.) 
Maxim-Res ipsa loquitur '-Applicabilily of-Bus accident causing 
injuries and deaths of passengers-Disciplinary Authority terminating the 
C services of the driver of the offending bus--lndustrial dispute-Due to lack 
of evidence termination order set aside by labour Court as upheld by Single 
Judge and Division Bench of High Court-Applicability of the maxim in the 
facts of the case-Held: Maller remilled to labour court to decide applicability 
of the maxim in the facts of the case-labour laws-Termination ofservice-
lndustrial Disputes Act, 19-17. 
D 
Respondent-workman was a drhcr in the appellant-Corporation. While 
he was driving the bus, in the process of overtaking, he collided the hind 
portion of his bus with another bus and as a consequence other bus dashed 
against a tree resulting in injuries to 56 and death of 4 passengers. Enquiry 
was made. After receipt of the Enquiry Report, Disciplinary Authority 
E dismissed him from the services. Respondent raised an industrial dispute. 
Labour Court held that although the domestic enquiry was fair and proper, 
but in absence of evidence to prove that his driving was fatal, dismissal order 
was liable to be set aside. Respondent was reinstated with full back wages. 
F 
Appellant-Corporation filed Writ Petition, wherein Single Judge of High 
Court upheld the finding of Labour Court. In Writ Appeal, Division Bench of 
the High Court held that in absence of evidence the doctrine of res ipsa 
loquitur was not applicable to the facts of the present case and dismissed the 
writ appeal. Hence the present appeal. 
G 
Allowing the appeal, and remanding the matter to Labour court, the 
Court 
HELD: I. The maxim "res ipsa loquilllr"does not embody any rule of 
substantive law nor a rule of evidence. It is resorted to when the accident is 
shown to have occurred and the cause of the accident is primarily within the 
11 
284 
-
.. 
MANAGING DIRECTOR. NORTHEAST K.R.T.C. , .. DEVIDAS MANIKRAO SADANANDA [KAPADIA. J] 285 
knowledge of the driver. Where the evidence shows dashing of the vehicle A 
against the tree was so violent that it caused the death of the passengers then 
the burden rests on the opposite party to show that the cause of the accident 
could not have been avoided by exercise of ordinary care and caution. 
1288-A-B; D-EI 
Shyam Sunder and Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan, 1197411 SCC 690; B 
Pushpabai Purshottam Udesh and Ors. v. Mis. Ranjit Glning and Pressing 
Co. (P) Ltd and Anr., [ 19771 2 SCC 745 and Cho/an Roadways Ltd v. G. 
Thirugnanasambandam, 1200513 SCC 241, referred to. 
2. The facts show that the offending bus collided with the hind portion C 
of the other bus. That other bus was running in front of the offending bus. 
The impact of the offending bus running into the other bus was so great that 
the other bus went and dashed into a tree resulting in injuries to 56 
passengers and death of 4 lives. The matter is remitted to the Labour Court 
to decide whether on the facts and circumstances of this case the maxim "res 
ipsa loquilllr" applies or not. 1287-G; 289-CI 
D 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4147 of2006. 
From the Judgment and final Order dated 14.3.2005 of the High Court 
of Kamataka and Bangalore in W.A. No. 6521/2002 (L. KSRTC) 
Basava Prabhu S. Patil, V.N. Raghupathy. B. Subrahmanya Prasad and E 
Narayan P Kengasur for the Appellant. 
Anitha Shenoy for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
. KAPADIA, J. Leave granted. 
This civil appeal by grant of special leave to appeal is directed against 
the judgment of the Division Bench of the Kamataka High Court dated 
14.3.2005 in Writ Appeal No.6521 of2002 by which the writ appeal preferred 
F 
by Northeast Karnataka Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to G 
as, "the Corporation") stood dismissed. 
The short question which arises for determination in this civil appeal is: 
whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Labour Court misdirected 
itself in not invoking the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, namely, the facts speak 
for themselves. 
H 
286 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 
A 
The Corporation is an 'Undertaking' which is catering to the requirements 
of the travelling public in various parts of the State of Karnataka. It has more 
than 60,000 employees appointed under Karnataka Stat

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.