Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Kalubhai Dulabhai Prajapati, was travelling in a goods tempo (GJ-23-W-788) on 12.06.2012 when a Maruti Eeco car (GJ-17-N-7288) driven rashly and negligently dashed into the tempo, causing grievous injuries to the appellant resulting in permanent partial disability. He filed a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Kheda at Nadiad, which was registered as MACP No.847 of 2012. The Tribunal, after evaluating evidence, held that the accident occurred due to contributory negligence of both drivers, apportioning 80% liability on the Eeco driver and 20% on the tempo driver. The Tribunal partly allowed the claim and awarded Rs. 1,50,000/- as compensation. Aggrieved by the quantum, the appellant filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Act seeking enhancement. The High Court heard learned advocates for the appellant and the insurance companies. The Court examined the evidence on record and found that the Tribunal's apportionment of contributory negligence was based on proper appreciation of evidence and was not perverse, hence it was upheld. On the issue of quantum, the Court noted that the Tribunal had not adequately compensated the appellant for medical expenses, pain and suffering, loss of amenities, and future loss of income. Considering the nature of injuries and disability, the Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 3,00,000/-. The appeal was partly allowed, directing the insurance companies to pay the enhanced amount with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization, with the liability apportioned as per the Tribunal's finding.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Contributory Negligence - Apportionment of Liability - Section 173 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Claimant was a passenger in a goods tempo which collided with a Maruti Eeco car - Tribunal apportioned negligence 80% on Eeco driver and 20% on tempo driver - High Court upheld the apportionment as based on evidence and not perverse - Held that the Tribunal's finding on contributory negligence is a finding of fact not liable to be interfered with in appeal (Paras 5-7). B) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Quantum - Sections 166, 168 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Claimant suffered permanent partial disability - Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,50,000/- - High Court enhanced compensation considering medical expenses, pain and suffering, loss of amenities, and future loss of income - Held that the compensation should be just and reasonable, and enhanced the award to Rs. 3,00,000/- (Paras 8-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Tribunal's apportionment of contributory negligence at 80:20 between the two drivers was correct, and whether the compensation awarded was just and proper.
Final Decision
Appeal partly allowed. The judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified. The appellant is entitled to total compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The liability shall be apportioned as per the Tribunal's finding (80% by insurer of Eeco car and 20% by insurer of tempo).
Law Points
- Contributory negligence
- Apportionment of liability
- Third party claim
- Goods vehicle passenger
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- Section 173
