US Constitution Trumps Presidential Tariff Powers
28 Feb 2026
Non-Compliance with Court Summons Amounts to Contempt: Allahabad HC Issues Warrant Against HDFC Life Branch Head in Cheating Bail Case
02 Mar 2026
Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
KERALA STATE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT – Appellant
Versus
JOY WILSON M. V. S/O VINCENT – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
1. Its an unkind cut when the victim of a road accident is accused of negligence crossing a road through the designated “Zebra Crossing” further confounded by the fact that the offending vehicle was the police car, driven by a Police Driver.
2. This case exposes the underlying maladies on our roads - the complete lack of knowledge of road safety by drivers; with generously added recklessness and cavalier regard for law.
3. Pedestrians, especially children and the aged, are probably the most vulnerable road users. The chaotic confusion in our roads makes matters far more dangerous; and when pedestrians are run down even on “Zebra Crossings” it shows how precious little our drivers know of the Rules of User of roads.
4. The appellant is the Kerala State Insurance Department, which impugn the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery (‘Tribunal’
Rules of Road Regulations, 1989, render it statutorily obliged for driver of a Motor Vehicle to slow down at a road intersection, a road junction, pedestrian crossing or a road corner.
The court clarified the principles of contributory negligence, emphasizing that a pedestrian's crossing does not automatically imply negligence, particularly when the driver fails to exercise due cau....
The settlement amount paid immediately after the accident should be for the injuries suffered and not for withdrawing the FIR. The plea of contributory negligence cannot be raised for the first time ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of contributory negligence and the determination of compensation under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicle Act.
The court emphasized the driver's duty of care and established clear negligence due to the violation of traffic rules, resulting in a fatal accident.
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
Listen Article