High Court of Karnataka Partly Allows Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Due to Contributory Negligence of Deceased. Deceased's Failure to Wear Helmet and Riding with Negligent Driver Led to 25% Reduction in Compensation.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Prosecution
  • 12
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by the Insurance Company, ICICI Lombard GIC Ltd., against the judgment and award dated 26th July 2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in MVC No.8301/2007. The Tribunal had awarded compensation of Rs.19,75,000/- with interest at 6% per annum to the claimants, who are the wife and minor children of the deceased M.N. Shivareddy. The deceased died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 20th May 2007. The claimants contended that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motorcycle, and sought compensation. The Insurance Company argued that the deceased was a pillion rider and was not wearing a helmet, and that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider, and therefore the deceased contributed to the accident. The court considered the issue of contributory negligence. The court noted that the deceased was riding as a pillion on a motorcycle driven by the 4th respondent, and that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider. The court held that the deceased, by not wearing a helmet and by riding with a negligent driver, contributed to the accident. The court apportioned contributory negligence at 25% against the deceased. Consequently, the court reduced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal by 25%. The net compensation payable was calculated as Rs.14,81,250/-. The court directed the Insurance Company to deposit the reduced amount with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till deposit. The appeal was partly allowed.

Headnote

A) Motor Accident Claims - Contributory Negligence - Apportionment of Fault - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 173(1) - The deceased, a pillion rider, was not wearing a helmet and the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motorcycle. The court held that the deceased contributed to the accident by not wearing a helmet and by riding with a negligent driver, and apportioned contributory negligence at 25% against the deceased. (Paras 5-7)

B) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Reduction - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 173(1) - The Tribunal awarded Rs.19,75,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. The High Court reduced the compensation by 25% due to contributory negligence, resulting in a net award of Rs.14,81,250/-. (Paras 8-9)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Tribunal erred in not considering the contributory negligence of the deceased and in awarding excessive compensation?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal partly allowed. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reduced by 25% on account of contributory negligence. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the reduced amount of Rs.14,81,250/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till deposit.

Law Points

  • Contributory negligence
  • Motor Vehicle Act
  • 1988
  • Section 173(1)
  • Compensation reduction
  • Negligence apportionment
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (KAR) (10) 4

M.F.A.No.672 OF 2015 (MV)

2015-10-13

N.K. PATIL, PRADEEP.D.WAINGANKAR

B.C. Shivannegowda, L. Harish Kumar, Jagadeesh.H.T

M/s. ICICI Lombard GIC Ltd.

Smt. Bharthi S Reddy & Others

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against judgment and award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

Remedy Sought

Insurance Company sought reduction of compensation awarded to claimants

Filing Reason

Insurance Company challenged the award on grounds of contributory negligence and excessive compensation

Previous Decisions

Tribunal awarded Rs.19,75,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. in MVC No.8301/2007

Issues

Whether the deceased contributed to the accident by not wearing a helmet and riding with a negligent driver? Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant (Insurance Company) argued that the deceased was a pillion rider without helmet and the accident was due to rider's negligence, hence contributory negligence should be applied. Respondents (Claimants) argued that the deceased was innocent and the accident was solely due to the rider's negligence.

Ratio Decidendi

A pillion rider who does not wear a helmet and rides with a negligent driver contributes to the accident, and contributory negligence can be apportioned against the deceased. The compensation is reduced proportionately.

Judgment Excerpts

Though this appeal is posted for Admission, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. This appeal by the Insurance Company is directed against the judgment and award dated 26th July 2014, passed in MVC No.8301/2007, by the IX Additional Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-7, Bangalore (SCCH-7), awarding a compensation of Rs.19,75,000/- with interest @ 6% P.A. from the date of petition till the date of payment.

Procedural History

The claimants filed MVC No.8301/2007 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which awarded compensation on 26th July 2014. The Insurance Company appealed against the award in M.F.A.No.672/2015 before the High Court of Karnataka.

Acts & Sections

  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: 173(1)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Partly Allows Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Due to Contributory Negligence of Deceased. Deceased's Failure to Wear Helmet and Riding with Negligent Driver Led to 25% Reduction in Compensation.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging MPLADS Circular Allowing Funds for Private Hospitals in COVID-19 Relief. Circular dated April 8, 2020, permitting MPLADS funds for private hospitals is intra vires the MPLAD Scheme and not arbitrary.