Back
2026 Supreme(Raj) 183
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J.
Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Through Its Managing Director – Appellant
Versus
Magan Lal @ Tigor, S/o. Sh. Mangi Lal – Respondent
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 490 Of 2001 Connected With S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 84 Of 2003
Decided On : 10-02-2026
For the Appellant : Mr. Dishant Kiroriwal
Court upheld the principle of contributory negligence, confirming both parties were liable in an accident, and instructed re-computation of compensation per relevant guidelines.
Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act -Contributory Negligence - Liability of parties in accident - The court upheld the tribunal's finding of 50% liability on both parties, stating, "the learned Tribunal has rightly evaluated and accessed the evidence...and has correctly come to the conclusion that both the parties were negligent" (Paras 1-13).
(B) Compensation Calculation - The court emphasized the need for re-computation of compensation according to guidelines, observing that the initial award amount was to be enhanced and divided based on contributory negligence (Paras 7-9).
Facts of the case:
The claimant, while driving a moped, was involved in an accident with a bus owned by the appellant, resulting in injuries for which compensation was sought. The tribunal awarded Rs. 2,10,880/- after finding the claimant 50% negligent (Paras 3-5).
Findings of Court:
The court agreed with the tribunal that both parties were negligent, thus confirming the reduced compensation.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the appellant should be held liable for 50% of the awarded amount given the claimant's comparative negligence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that contributory negligence was applicable as both parties shared fault in the accident.
Result: Appeal dismissed; compensation re-computed and enhanced with interest.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accident details and compensation awarded. (Para 3 , 4 , 10) |
| 2. arguments against liability and negligence. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. decision on appeal and guidelines for compensation. (Para 8 , 14) |
| 4. court's evaluation of negligence and liability. (Para 9 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J.
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 490/2001:-
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant-Pepsu Road Transport Corporation.
2. Nobody is present on behalf of the respondent/claimant- Magan Lal.
3. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant- Pepsu Road Transport Corporation against the judgment and award dated 05.01.2001 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bikaner (for short ‘learned Tribunal’) in M.A.C.T. Case No.41/1997, whereby, the learned tribunal while allowing the claim application filed by the claimant- Magan Lal held the appellant-Pepsu Road Transport Corporation liable to pay 50% of the awarded amount.
4. Briefly noted the facts in the present appeal is that the respondent/claimant- Magan Lal while driving on his moped (bike) met with an accident on 23.12.1995 with a bus bearing registration No.PB 11/C 9570 belonging to the appellant- Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, which was coming from the side of Bhagat Singh Chowk. In the said accident, the respondent/claimant Magan Lal sustained multiple injuries, for which he was treated at PBM Hospital, Bikaner. On account of the injuries suffered in the accident, the respondent/claimant Magan Lal filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal seeking award of suitable compensation. The learned Tribunal, after framing of the issues decided the claim petition of the respondent/claimant Magan lal vide judgment and award dated 05.01.2001 and awarded total compensation to the tune of Rs.4,21,761/-. Since, the respondent/claimant Magan Lal was found 50% negligent in the accident, therefore, the compensation was reduced by 50% and the appellant- Pepsu Road Transport Corporation was directed to pay only Rs.2,10,880/- as compensation to the respondent/claimant. Hence, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant-Pepsu Road Transport Corporation challenging his liability to the extent of 50% of the awarded amount.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant- Pepsu Road Transport Corporation vehemently submits that the findings on Issue Nos. 1 & 4 are erroneous on the ground that the bus was being driven by its driver Rajendra Singh on the correct side of the road and it was squarely the fault of respondent/claimant Magan Lal, who was rashly and negligently driving his moped (bike), thus, causing accident on 23.12.1995. He further submits that a bare perusal of the site plan (Ex.-3) placed on record clearly shows that the accident took place at the center of the road. He also submits that since the bus was coming from Sangariya and was being driven on the correct side i.e. left side of the road, it was the fault of the respondent/claimant Magan Lal, who was coming from the Bhagat Singh Chowk and who should have driven his moped (bike) on the extreme left side of the road, however, due to his rash and negligent driving, he came in the center of the road collided with the front portion of the bus. Thus, he sustained injuries on account of his own fault.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant- Pepsu Road Transport Corporation further submits that even in the cross examination of AW-1 (Magan Lal), he has admitted that he had seen the bus from a distance and that the bus was being driven on his correct side. He further submits that a cumulative reading of the site plan and the statement of respondent/claimant Magan Lal, clearly establishes that respondent/claimant Magan Lal was driving his moped (bike) rashly and negligently and met with an accident with the bus of the appellant- Pepsu Road Transport Corporation which was being driven by its Driver-Rajendra Singh, on correct side of the road.
7. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that fastening 50% liability upon the
