High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses Insurer's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Negligence Finding Upheld. The Court held that the Tribunal's finding on negligence was not perverse and contributory negligence was not proved by the insurer.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: GOA In Favour of Prosecution
  • 130
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case arises from a motor accident on 17.01.2021 where Mario Bernard Fernandes (Bernard), riding an Activa scooter, collided with a Toyota Qualis insured by the appellant, National Insurance Company. Bernard died in the accident. His 66-year-old widowed mother filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, North Goa at Panaji, which awarded compensation of Rs.1,31,98,000/- with 6% interest. The insurer appealed, challenging the Tribunal's finding of negligence against the insured vehicle's driver and arguing contributory negligence by Bernard. The High Court heard arguments from Ms. Yadika Mandrekar for the appellant and Mr. Milton Marshal for the respondent claimant. The Court examined the evidence, including the FIR and police depositions, and found that the Tribunal's conclusion on negligence was based on material evidence and not perverse. The Court also held that the insurer failed to discharge its burden to prove contributory negligence, as the mere fact that Bernard was not wearing a helmet or came from a side road did not establish his negligence. The appeal was dismissed, and the award was upheld.

Headnote

A) Motor Accident Claims - Negligence - Finding of Fact - The Tribunal's finding that the driver of the insured vehicle was negligent was based on evidence, including the FIR and depositions, and was not perverse. The High Court declined to interfere in appeal. (Paras 2-10)

B) Motor Accident Claims - Contributory Negligence - Burden of Proof - The insurer failed to prove contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. The mere fact that the deceased was not wearing a helmet or came from a side road does not automatically establish contributory negligence. (Paras 5-10)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Tribunal's finding on negligence was perverse and whether there was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The impugned Judgment and Award dated 30.01.2024 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, North Goa at Panaji is upheld.

Law Points

  • Negligence in motor accident claims
  • contributory negligence
  • burden of proof on insurer
  • scope of appeal against findings of fact
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (12) 389

First Appeal No.1 of 2025

2025-12-24

M. S. Sonak, J.

2025:BHC-GOA:2571

Ms. Yadika Mandrekar for the Petitioner, Mr. Milton Marshal for Respondent No.1

The National Insurance, Panaji Division I, Souza Towers, 2nd Floor, S/4-5, Dr. Domingos Souza Road, Near Municipal Garden, Panaji Goa 403001 Through its Authorised Officer Manager, Mrs. Catarina L Alvares

1. Mrs. Conciecao Especiosa Mariana Fernandes, 2. Mr. Joaquim Gabriel Monteiro

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against award of compensation in motor accident claim

Remedy Sought

Insurer sought to set aside the Tribunal's award on negligence and contributory negligence

Filing Reason

Insurer challenged the finding of negligence and alleged contributory negligence by deceased

Previous Decisions

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1,31,98,000/- with 6% interest on 30.01.2024

Issues

Whether the Tribunal's finding on negligence was perverse? Whether there was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the deceased was negligent as he came from a side road without helmet and dashed against insured vehicle; FIR was not pursued; police depositions showed no negligence of insured vehicle driver. Appellant alternatively argued contributory negligence of at least 50%. Respondent supported the Tribunal's finding based on evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal's finding on negligence is a finding of fact based on evidence and not perverse; the insurer failed to prove contributory negligence. The High Court will not interfere with such findings in appeal.

Judgment Excerpts

Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The Appellant Insurer challenges the Judgment and Award dated 30.01.2024 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, North Goa at Panaji (Tribunal), awarding the Respondent Claimant compensation of Rs.1,31,98,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum...

Procedural History

Claim petition filed by widow mother of deceased before Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, North Goa at Panaji; Tribunal awarded compensation on 30.01.2024; Insurer filed First Appeal No.1 of 2025 before High Court of Bombay at Goa; High Court dismissed appeal on 24.12.2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Forfeiture of Land Transferred in Violation of Ceiling Act. Exchange of Ceiling Surplus Land Without Collector's Sanction Under Section 29 of Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) A...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Assessee in Sales Tax Dispute on Works Contracts; State's Levy Not Saved by Article 277 After Agreement. Article 278 Agreement Between State and Union Broke Continuity of Pre-Constitution Levy, Rendering Tax Unenforceable After ...