Question

Principle: A master shall be responsible for the wrongful acts of his servants in the course of his employment.

Facts: The Syndicate Bank was running a small savings scheme under which its authorized agents would go round and collect small savings from several people on daily basis. These agents would get commission, on the deposits so collected. Ananth was one such agent, collecting deposits from factory workers engaged on daily wages. Though he regularly carried on his business for sometime, slowly he started appropriating deposits for his personal use and one day he just disappeared. One Fatima, who had been handing over her savings to him found that nearly for a month before his disappearance, he was not depositing her savings at all. The Bank, when approached, took the stand that Ananth was not its regular and paid employee and therefore, it was not responsible for his misconduct. She files a suit against the Bank 

विकल्प

• The Bank is not liable, since Ananth was not its salaried employee

• The Bank is liable since Ananth was projected as its employee

• The Bank is not liable, since it did not know about misappropriation by Ananth

• None of the above

Answer 1

The Bank is liable since Ananth was projected as its employee

Explanation:

The fact that the bank under a scheme authorized agents to collect money on commission basis makes the bank liable, as the bank projected the agent as its employee and the agent while collecting deposits on the behalf of the back-projected himself as an employee.