Hotel vicariously liable for drowning of a young man in un-attended swimming pool
Head Notes:
“FIR suggesting foul play and murder was filed which was ultimately found to have not been proved and no criminal negligence was established”
Incident of drowning in swimming pool took place on 26.6. 2013.Query raised before commission on 29.8.13,11.1.24,21.5 24 during the period criminal case progressed and concluded as not established criminal negligence
“Principal of res Ipsa loquitur can be applied to assume that absence of attending staff for short period witnessed the accident which has not been found to be an outcome of any foul play in the criminal case.”
“Complainant is allowed with an award of Rs 25 lakhs as lump sum compensation and in case of payment within three months, interest there upon @9%p.a.to be paid”
Krishan Seth V/S M/S Vishal International Hotel&Ans &M/S Motel Damjit;S (Guj)P. Ltd NC
Decided on 4.11.2024
Facts :
Complainant is the father of deceased son Neeraj Seth who drowned in the swimming pool in the Hotel on 26.6.2013 FIR filed for foul play and murder which failed to establish any criminal nrgligence and accused acquitted.
No lapses on the part of Hotel also found as the pool was well equipped and incident took place after closuretime at 9.00pm
Case before the National Commission is that “Principal of res ipsa loquitur can be applied to assume that absence of attending staff for short period was the cause that immediate help could not be extended.The facts as narrated were-
Attending staff was absent at the time Neeraj entered the pool short before closure of swimming pool .
No medical help or aid was given when found body floating and no efforts to revive the deceased was done.
There were no CCTV Cameras installed at the swimming pool as they deserved to be kept secluded.
Saff was not para medically trained,did not touch the body till police and fire brigade came
NC Held:
“Principal of res ipsa loquitur can be applied to assume that absence of attending staff for short period was the cause that immediate help could not be extended “
“Complainant is allowed with an award of Rs 25 lakhs as lump sum compensation and in case of payment within three months,interest there upon @9%p.a.to be paid”
There is no bar to entertain a civil case even if negligence is not proved
