Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
PARTH PRATEEM SAHU
United India Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Rani Vastrakar W/o Late Ajay – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Appellant-Claimant has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”), challenging the award dated 16.09.2019 passed by Learned Eighth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 397/2018, whereby learned Claims Tribunal allowed the application filed by applicants/ Respondents No. 1 to 5 under Section 166 of the Act, 1988 in part and awarded Rs. 19,66,976/- as compensation in a fatal accident case.
2. Facts of the case relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 07.04.2018 Ajay Vastrakar, after finishing his work, was going to his house at village Deori Padhi. At about 10:00 pm, when he reached near asphalt plant of village Mopka, Ajay Vastrakar collided with paver machine No. 13091379 (hereinafter referred to “offending vehicle”) parked on middle of the road in negligent manner by non-applicant no. 1/ Respondent No. 6, without showing any indication of the vehicle. In the accident, Ajay Vastrakar suffered fatal injuries and succumbed to injuries. Accident was reported by Krishna Kumar Vastrakar on 08.04.2018 to police station-Sarkand
The absence of warning signals while parking a vehicle constitutes sole negligence, making the vehicle owner fully liable for resultant accidents, with no contributory negligence from the victim.
Point of Law : Motor Accident - tort-feasor – Evidence which was recorded immediately after the accident, cannot be over looked and give way to the ocular evidence of the person, whose presence at th....
The court established that contributory negligence must be proven with clear evidence, and improper parking of a vehicle can constitute negligence under the MV Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the proper attribution of contributory negligence and the computation of just and reasonable compensation.
Both the deceased and the truck owner exhibited negligence, leading to a 75:25 liability split for compensation in a vehicular accident case.
The court established that the principle of ‘res ipsa loquitur’ can shift the burden of proof in negligence cases, particularly when a charge-sheet is filed against the driver, indicating prima facie....
Fatal accident – Contributory negligence on part of driver of vehicle involved in accident cannot be vicariously attached to passengers so as to reduce compensation awarded to passengers or their leg....
The court established that negligence in a motor accident can be attributed to the failure of the vehicle owner to exhibit proper safety signals, impacting liability for compensation.
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
