In Hanuman Dass v. Usha Rani and another (supra), the admitted position was that the truck in the said case had struck against an electric pole standing on the corner of the terrace in front of the house of Rameshwar Dayal, upon which Usha Rani, in order to escape injury, had mounted. A vehicle, it was noticed, is to be driven on the path, and in the course of normal driving, there is no question of its leaving the path and striking against the platform and the electric pole abutting the path unless the driver happened to be negligent or there were circumstances which left him no choice but to take the vehicle to a point where it struck the electric pole. In the facts of the said case, it was held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was straightaway attracted, which means that the fact speak for themselves for the negligence of the driver unless, he placed on record the circumstances which left him no choice but to take the truck in the direction of the electric pole. No such explanation was forthcoming in the said case. In the circumstances, by virtue of the application of the aforesaid doctrine, AMIT KAUNDAL 2014.08.29 16:23it was held that the initial onus had to be on the driver to prove that I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
