S.M. Subramaniam, J.

1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and Decree, dated 10.06.2014 made in M.C.O.P. No. 154 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Special District Judge, Tiruchirappalli. The accident took place on 08.02.2012 at about 08.00 p.m., in Trichy - Thanjavur National Highways, Sanarpatti. The death took place instantly on the spot and the heirs of the deceased filed the claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum Special District Judge, Tiruchirappalli in M.C.O.P. No. 154 of 2013.

2. The present appeal is filed by the appellant/Insurance Company on the ground that the deceased while coming in a two-wheeler dashed back side of the lorry, which was insured with the appellant/Insurance Company.

3. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company is that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased persons because he voluntarily dashed behind the lorry and the contributory negligence is to be fixed on the deceased person. The Tribunal has not considered the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased person and on that ground, the present appeal is filed.

4. The fact is to be seen that the lorry was parked on the road side and parking of the lorry on the National Highways itself is a traffic violation and therefore, the ground raised by the learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company cannot be accepted. Now, the practice prevails that the lorry drivers and the private bus drivers without knowing the consequences callously and negligently parking the vehicles on the National Highways, which also causes accident and therefore, contributory negligence cannot be fixed only against the deceased and it is to be fixed on the lorry driver also, who parked the vehicle in the National-Highways.

There are no systems in our Country to prevent such illegal parking in the National Highways and many accidents are happening due to the illegal parking on the National Highways. It is for the State authorities to initiate action for preventing such negligence and callous parking in the National Highways through effective police patrolling and by installing CC TV cameras in the required points. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the ground raised by the learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company is not sound enough to consider that the contributory negligence is to be fixed against the deceased person alone.

5. Section 118 of the Motor Vehicles Act enables the Central Government to make regulations for the driving of motor vehicles by issuing notification in the Official Gazette. Pursuant to its power under Section 118 of the Act, the Central Government has prescribed the 1989 Regulations. Para 15 of these Regulations deals with the parking of the vehicle. Sub-para (1) of Para 15 provides that every driver of a motor vehicle parking on any road shall park in such a way that it does not cause or is not likely to cause danger, obstruction or undue inconvenience to other road users and if the manner of parking is indicated by any sign board or markings on the road side, the driver is required to park his vehicle accordingly. Sub-para (2) of Para 15 is a prohibitory provision whereby a driver of a motor vehicle is prohibited not to park his vehicle at the places set out in clauses (i) to (xi). The High Court relied upon clause (iv) which provides that a driver of a motor vehicle shall not park his vehicle in a main road or one carrying fast traffic.

6. This apart, Rule 107 of the Motor Vehicle Rules, 1988, deals with Top lights and Rule 109 deals with parking light, which reads as follows:-

"Rule 107. Top lights. - Every goods vehicle including trailer and semi-trailer other than three-wheelers and vehicles with overall width not exceeding 2.1 metres shall be fitted with two white lights at the top right and left corners showing light to the front and two red lights at the top right and left