( 1 ) AMONGST the several issues raised by the learned trial Judge were issues Nos. 1 and 2 viz. whether the plaintiff proved that the accident was the direct result of rashness or negligence on the part of the defendants drivers and whether the defendant-corporation proved that there was contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiffs. In para 9 of his judgment in suit No. 175/1953 the learned trial Judge held that the defendant corporation failed to adduce any evidence to establish contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiffs and found against the defendant on that issue. As regards the question whether the accident took place in consequence of rash or negligent driving on the part of the drivers the learned Judge observed that in cases of this type it would be enough if the plaintiffs were to establish the accident; that it was not necessary for such a plaintiff to lead positive evidence to prove negligence on the part of the defendants servants as from the mere fact of an accident the law would assume that the burden of proving negligence has been discharged by the plaintiff and the defendant would then have to meet a prima facie case established