The top court has held that the burden of proof lies on the hotel to explain that any loss or damage caused to the vehicles parked was not on account of its negligence or want of care
Current Affairs:In a milestone decision, the Supreme Court has held that lodgings can’t deny remuneration under the clothing of “proprietor’s hazard” proviso to its visitor or guests for robbery of vehicle left through its staff or valet.
The top court has held that the weight of confirmation lies on the inn to clarify that any misfortune or harm caused to the vehicles left was not by virtue of its carelessness or need of care.
It said valet leaving at the lodging is not normal for leaving office where it is the proprietor’s duty to locate a reasonable parking space, leave the vehicle effectively, return, and take out the endless supply of the leaving token/slip.
A seat of judges M Shantanagoudar and Ajay Rastogi held, “When ownership of the vehicle is given to the inn staff or valet, there is a suggested legally binding commitment to restore the vehicle in a protected condition upon the heading of the proprietor”.
It held, “the inn proprietor can’t contract out of obligation for its carelessness or that of its workers in regard of a vehicle of its visitor in any situation”.
The seat said that even where there is a general or explicit exclusion condition, there stays a by all appearances weight of confirmation on the lodging to clarify that any misfortune or harm caused to the vehicles left was not by virtue of its carelessness or need of care according to arrangements of the Contract Act.
Aditi Mehta 