Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 – Motor accident claim – Contributory negligence – When not – Appellant, riding pillion on a scooter met with an accident with a trailer leading to amputation of his legs – Tribunal and the High Court found contributory negligence on the part of the scooter owner-driver too holding that the negligence on the part of the trailer driver was only partial – Interference with:
Held: Tribunal and the High Court erred in finding contributory negligence of the scooter driver – The trailer was being driven rashly and negligently – Thus, the mere fact that the driver of the scooter had only a learners licence would not necessarily lead to a conclusion of contributory negligence on his part – There can be no negligence found on the scooter driver also by the mere fact that the accident occurred on a collision at the tail-end of a long trailer, when the scooter driver had better visibility; which is a question of fact liable to be proved and not merely presumed –The scooter driver absolved of the contributory negligence – On the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, compensation of ₹16,00,000/awarded – Appellant entitled to compensation from the insurer of the offending vehicle-trailer – Just compensation. [Paras 13, 14, 16] Motor accident claims – Just compensation – Grant of: Held: The claim petition does not bind the Court in granting just compensation. [Para 16]
Motor accident claims – Standard of proof – Preponderance of probabilities:
Held: In a motor accident claim, there is no adversarial litigation and it is the preponderance of probabilities which reign supreme in adjudication of the tortious liability flowing from it. [Para 11]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.