Question

Principle: Qui facit per alium facit per se, i.e., he who does things through others does it himself.
Facts: Nisha, the owner of a car, asked her friend Saurabh to take her car and drive the same to her office. As the car was near her office, it hit a pedestrian Srikant on account of Saurabh's negligent driving and injured him seriously. Now, Srikant files a suit for damages against Nisha.

Options

• Nisha is not liable as it was the negligence of Saurabh

• Saurabh is solely liable as Nisha was not driving the  car

• Nisha is liable as Saurabh was driving under her  authority and for her purpose

• Saurabh will be exempted from liability under the principle of inevitable accident

Answer 1

Nisha is liable as Saurabh was driving under her authority and for her purpose.

Explanation:
Option Nisha is liable as Saurabh was driving under her authority and for her purpose apparently seems correct as the guiding principle says that he who does things through others,  does it himself. Thus in a given case, Nisha authorised Saurabh to drive her car and for her purpose, she is responsible for the accident.  
However, this case is playable in the court of law as  Nisha had not asked Saurabh to hit anyone further she did not authorise Saurabh to drive in a way to hit someone as the work was not time-bound further Saurabh could have driven carefully so he should also be personally held liable.