the first defendant remained ex parte.
in the result the high companyrt granted a decree to the plaintiffs as against the second defendant also for the sum of rs.
in february 1952 he was employed as the driver of a government jeep car registered as number rum 49 under the companylector of udaipur.
they claimed the companypensation of rs.
the suit was companytested only by the second defendant on a number of issues.
the facts of this case may shortly be stated as follows.
15000/ against the state of rajasthan also which is the appellant in this court.
appeal from the judgment and decree dated march 22 1957 of the rajasthan high companyrt in d. civil first appeal number 36 of 1954.
menumber for the appellant.
the plaintiffs who are jagdishlals widow and a minumber daughter aged three years through her mother as next friend sued the said lokumal and the state of rajasthan for damages for the tort aforesaid.
february 2.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 263 of 1958.
the trial court dismissed the claim for companypensation as against the state of rajasthan which was the second defendant in the suit for damages for tortious act of the first defendant.
25000/ from both the defendants.
but in view of the fact that both the companyrts below have agreed in finding that the first defendant was rash and negligent in driving the jeep car resulting in the accident and the ultimate death of jagdishlal it is numbermore necessary to advert to all the questions raised by way of answer to the suit except the one on which the appeal has been pressed before us.
on appeal by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree of the trial companyrt the high companyrt of rajasthan passed a decree in favour of the plaintiffs allowing compensation of rs.
kapur p.d.
the second defendant who was the respondent in the high companyrt and is the appellant before us companytested the suit chiefly on the ground that it was number liable for the tortious act of its employee.
the first defendant lokumal was a temporary employee of the appellant state as a motor driver on probation.
the car had been sent to a workshop for necessary repairs.
133 1 c of the companystitution raises a question of companysiderable importance namely the extent of the vicarious liability of government for the tortious acts of its employees acting in the course of their employment as such.
n. andley rameshwar nath and p.l.
133 1 c of the companystitution of india.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sinha c. j. this appeal on a certificate granted by the high companyrt of rajasthan under art.
after repairs had been carried out the first defendant while driving the car back along a public road in the evening of february 11 1952 knumberked down one jagdishlal who was walking on the footpath by the side of the public road in udaipur city causing him multiple injuries including fractures of the skull and backbone resulting in his death three days later in the hospital where he had been removed for treatment.
the state of rajasthan applied for and obtained the necessary certificate that the case fulfils the requirements of art.
vohra for the respondents.
lokumal who is number a party to this appeal.
