Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI BENCH
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
Sainath S/o Vishwanath Gourshetty – Appellant
Versus
Prashant S/o Pandurangh Rao Kulkarni – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR, J.
1. This appeal is filed by the claimant/appellant for modifying the judgment and award dated 11.06.2018, passed in MVC No.558/2015, by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM and Additional MACT, Bidar and for enhancement of compensation.
2. Brief facts leading to filing of the claim petition for compensation are as under:
That on 03.06.2015, the appellant/claimant along with his friend Dashrath were proceeding on a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-32/EF-2200 from Bidar to Mandaknalli. The appellant/claimant, being the rider and his friend was pillion rider. At about 10-00 p.m., when they were proceeding on Kamthana road, near Kamthana bridge, the driver of the Mahindra Commander Jeep bearing registration No.KA-38/M-0352 came from Yedlapur side, in a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of the appellant/claimant. Consequently, the appellant/claimant and the pillion rider fell down and sustained grievous injuries. The appellant/claimant made a claim petition. The Tribunal has assessed compensation at Rs.7,89,700/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The Tribunal held that there is contributor
The court found that attribution of 40% contributory negligence to the claimant was erroneous, as the charge-sheet was filed only against the offending vehicle's driver.
Contributory negligence attribution must be supported by clear evidence; inaccurate assessment can lead to wrongful liability.
The court ruled that lack of a driving license does not imply the claimant's negligence and emphasized the importance of actual income assessment over notional standards in determining compensation.
Point of Law : Rider of motorcycle is also responsible for the accident. But attributing 60% of contributory negligence to the rider of the motorcycle, especially, in the absence of any oral evidence....
Contributory negligence assessed at 10% establishes that compensation must reflect accurate income estimates and disability assessments, leading to a modified award.
Contributory negligence should not be inferred solely from scene mahazar without sufficient evidence; appropriate compensation should reflect actual losses sustained by the injured.
Court affirmed that contributory negligence can be apportioned among parties, and under composite negligence, claimants can seek full compensation from any tortfeasor.
The court clarified the erroneous attribution of contributory negligence and enhanced the compensation awarded to the appellant.
Contributory negligence must be established with evidence; mere assumptions are insufficient to negate liability. Compensation modified based on medical evidence and disability assessment.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
