SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1980 Supreme(Raj) 293

P.K.BANERJEE
Ram Kumari Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Ram Kisan – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant:R.S. Purohit, Advocate.
For the Respondent: C.K. Garg for res. No. 1, and R.M. Lodha for resp No. 3.

JUDGMENT

1. - This appeal is directed against the order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kota rejecting the application of the appellant claming Rs. 30,000/- as damage for death of Geeta Rani, daugther of the appellant, Geeta Rani aged 7 years, when she was crossing the road, was run over by the truck and died on the spot. The learned judge held that Geeta Rani was neligent for her death and not the driver and therefore, the application was rejected. In my opinion, the finding of the learned judge is wrong. When a child is involved in the accident it is no answer to say that the child was negligent. I can understand an adult contributing to the negligence causing death or accident, but to say a child aged 7 years was negligent and therefore, the driver cannot be blamed is to say the least preposterous. It is always the duty of the driver to be vigilant whether on the road there is a child crossing the road and that is why the road sign; are always there when the children of the schools are crossing road. If the driver would have been vigilant, the death would not have been caused. I, therefore, hold that the death was caused by the negligence of the driver and therefore, the Insu




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top