NCLT: Suspended Directors Who are Prospective Resolution Applicants Cann’t Access Valuation Reports  ||  Supreme Court Clarifies Test For Granting Bail to Accused Added at Trial under Section 319 CrPC  ||  SC: Fresh Notification For Vijayawada ACB Police Station not Required After AP Bifurcation  ||  SC: Studying in a Government Institute Does Not Create an Automatic Right to a Government Job  ||  NCLT Mumbai: CIRP Claims Cannot Invoke the 12-Year Limitation Period For Enforcing Mortgage Rights  ||  NCLAT: Misnaming Guarantor as 'Director' in SARFAESI Notice Doesn't Void Guarantee Invocation  ||  Jharkhand HC: Mere Breach of Compromise Terms by an Accused Does Not Justify Bail Cancellation  ||  Cal HC: Banks Cannot Freeze a Company's Accounts Solely Due To ROC Labeling a 'Management Dispute'  ||  Rajasthan HC: Father’s Rape of His Daughter Transcends Ordinary Crime; Victim’s Testimony Suffices  ||  Delhi HC: Judge Who Reserved Judgment Must Deliver Verdict Despite Transfer; Successor Can't Rehear    

Supreme Court: Hotels Cannot Deny Claim for Theft of Vehicle Given to Valet - (18 Nov 2019)

CIVIL

Supreme Court has ruled that hotels cannot deny compensation under the garb of "owner's risk" clause to its visitors for theft of vehicle parked through its staff. The 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 negligence or want of care. Further the Court also said that valet parking at the hotel is unlike parking facility where it is the owner's responsibility to find a suitable parking spot.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   HOTEL  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved