Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Compensation Matter, Modifying Contributory Negligence Apportionment. High Court's Finding of Sole Negligence on Deceased Motorcyclist Reversed as Bus Driver's High Speed and Lack of Care Equally Contributed, Apportioning Negligence 60:40 and Awarding Rs.60,000 with Interest.

In Favour of Prosecution
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a fatal motor accident on April 4, 1971, on the National Highway from Madras to Bangalore at Kathur Junction. The deceased, Rajadurai, aged about 31 years and earning Rs.800 per month, was riding his motorcycle from west to east when a motor vehicle came between him and a bus. To save himself from being sandwiched, he took the extreme right and hit the left bumper of the bus, dying on the spot. His widow and children, the appellants, sought compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the deceased was earning Rs.800 per month and that the accident involved contributory negligence. It awarded a total sum of Rs.1 lakh, after giving benefit of contributory negligence. The Madras High Court, in Appeal against Order Nos.34 and 174 of 1973, reversed this finding, holding that the bus driver was not negligent and that the entire negligence lay on the part of the deceased, thereby denying compensation to the appellants. The appellants then approached the Supreme Court by special leave. The Supreme Court examined the evidence and reasoning of both the High Court and the Tribunal. It held that the High Court had not considered the evidence from the proper perspective. The Court noted that the bus driver was equally driving at high speed and that greater care was required of him to avoid an accident. It accepted that the deceased had taken the extreme right to avoid being sandwiched between a car and the bus, and as a consequence hit the left bumper of the bus. On these facts, the Supreme Court concluded that the bus driver equally contributed to the accident. It apportioned the negligence as 60% to the bus driver and 40% to the deceased. Consequently, the respondent was held liable to pay Rs.60,000, while the remaining Rs.40,000 was to be foregone by the appellants. The Court set aside the High Court order and modified the Tribunal order, awarding the appellants Rs.60,000 with interest at 60% from the date of the Tribunal judgment, i.e., November 30, 1972. The Court also addressed the liability of the insurance company. It noted that the original insurance company which insured the vehicle had been taken over by United India Insurance Company, a nationalized company, and directed that United India Insurance Company would be liable to pay proportionately to the extent of the insurance cover, with the balance recoverable from the owner of the vehicle. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Motor Accident Compensation - Contributory Negligence - Apportionment of Liability - Not mentioned - The deceased motorcyclist died after hitting the left bumper of a bus while taking extreme right to avoid being sandwiched between a car and bus; Tribunal awarded Rs.1 lakh after finding contributory negligence, but High Court reversed and denied compensation holding deceased solely negligent. Supreme Court reappraised evidence and held bus driver equally negligent due to high speed and lack of care, apportioned negligence 60:40 and directed payment of Rs.60,000 with interest at 60% from date of Tribunal judgment.

B) Motor Accident Compensation - Liability of Insurer - Successor Insurance Company - Not mentioned - The original insurance company was taken over by United India Insurance Company, a nationalized company; Supreme Court directed United India Insurance Company to pay proportionately to the extent of insurance cover, with balance recoverable from vehicle owner.

C) Motor Accident Compensation - Quantum of Compensation - Dependency and Earnings - Not mentioned - Deceased aged 31 years, earning Rs.800 per month, left widow and children; Supreme Court modified compensation to Rs.60,000 with interest at 60% from date of Tribunal judgment, apportioning negligence 60:40 between bus driver and deceased.

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the High Court erred in holding the deceased solely negligent and denying compensation; and the correct apportionment of negligence between the deceased and the bus driver.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; Tribunal order modified to award Rs.60,000 with interest at 60% from date of Tribunal judgment (30-11-1972); United India Insurance Company liable to extent of insurance cover, balance from owner; no costs.

Law Points

  • contributory negligence
  • apportionment of liability
  • duty of care of bus driver
  • liability of insurance company
  • quantum of compensation
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

1996 LawText (SC) (01) 85

1996-01-16

K. Ramaswamy, G.B. Pattanaik

1996 SCC (2) 157 JT 1996 (1) 586 1996 SCALE (1)563

Smt. Indrani Raja Durai & Ors.

Madras Motor & General Insurance Company & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal by special leave against High Court order denying motor accident compensation.

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought compensation for death of Rajadurai in motor accident and reversal of High Court order denying compensation.

Filing Reason

High Court held deceased solely negligent and denied compensation, overturning Tribunal's award of Rs.1 lakh.

Previous Decisions

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1 lakh after finding contributory negligence; High Court of Madras in Appeal against Order Nos.34 and 174 of 1973 reversed, holding bus driver not negligent and deceased solely negligent.

Issues

Whether the High Court erred in holding the deceased solely negligent and denying compensation What is the correct apportionment of negligence between the deceased motorcyclist and the bus driver Extent of liability of insurance company after nationalization

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that bus driver equally negligent due to high speed and lack of care, and High Court ignored evidence. Respondent contended that deceased was solely negligent for taking extreme right and hitting the bus.

Ratio Decidendi

In motor accident cases, when both parties contribute to negligence, liability is apportioned based on degree of fault; a driver of a heavy vehicle must exercise greater care to avoid accidents; on facts, bus driver's high speed made him equally negligent, so compensation awarded proportionate to negligence.

Judgment Excerpts

the driver of the bus equally was driving at high speed, greater care was required of him to see that no accident took place. negligence can be apportioned as 60% and 40%. appellants a entitled to a sum of Rs. 60,000/- with interest at 60% from the date of the judgment of the Tribunal dated November 30, 1972.

Procedural History

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1 lakh after finding contributory negligence; High Court of Madras in Appeal against Order Nos.34 and 174 of 1973 reversed, holding deceased solely negligent; appeal by special leave to Supreme Court.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Seeking Protection of Article 286(1)(a) Against Sales Tax Demands. Corporation or Company Is Not a Citizen Under Article 19 and Cannot Move Article 32 to Challenge Alleged Infringement of Fundamental Rights, Eve...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Mutation of Names in Revenue Records Without Collector's Permission for Transferable Land Under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. The Court held that when the land is transferable and heritable as per the sanad, no permiss...