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

1962 Supreme(P&H) 80

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Shamsher Bahadur, J.
State Of Punjab
Versus
Phool Kumari
First Appeal First Order No. 86 of 1961,
Decided On : APRIL 23, 1962

The apportionment of liability in a motor vehicle accident case should be proportionate to the degree of fault of each driver.

Headnote:

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - ACCIDENT - COMPENSATION - APPORTIONMENT OF LIABILITY - NEGLIGENCE OF DRIVERS - QUANTUM OF COMPENSATION - PRINCIPLES.

Fact of the Case:

A collision between a bus and a truck resulted in the death of a passenger and injuries to a cyclist. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal apportioned liability at two-thirds to the bus driver and one-third to the truck driver, and awarded compensation to the deceased's legal representatives and the injured cyclist.

Finding of the Court:

The court upheld the Tribunal's apportionment of liability, finding that both drivers were negligent. The bus driver failed to slow down or stop at the intersection, while the truck driver was driving at an excessive speed and failed to take evasive action.

Issues: 1. Whether the drivers of the bus and truck were negligent. 2. Whether the apportionment of liability by the Tribunal was appropriate. 3. Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal was reasonable.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that both drivers were negligent. The bus driver failed to slow down or stop at the intersection, while the truck driver was driving at an excessive speed and failed to take evasive action. 2. The court upheld the Tribunal's apportionment of liability at two-thirds to the bus driver and one-third to the truck driver, finding that it was reasonable and proportionate to the degree of fault of each driver. 3. The court upheld the Tribunal's award of compensation, finding that it was based on sound principles and was not unreasonable or unjust.

Final Decision: The appeals and revisions were dismissed with costs.

Judgment

1. This judgment will dispose of three appeals and two revisions, all arising out of the award given by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal on 18th of January, 1961.

2. As a result of a collision in Chandigarh at about 3 P.M. on 7th of September, 1959, between an omnibus of the Punjab Roadways and the truck driven by Gurdev Singh and belonging to Sarwan Singh, Shri Nand Kishore Tagore, who was an occupant of the bus, was killed while Yog Parkash, who was going on a cycle, received injuries. The Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 35,840/-to the legal representatives of Nand Kishore Tagore and a sum of Rs. 600/- to Yog Parkash. According to the award, two-thirds of the total compensation, that is to say Rs. 24,293/-is made payable by the Punjab State on behalf of the Punjab Roadways and the balance of Rs. 12,147/- by the Insurance Company on behalf of the owner of the truck.

Against this award, the Punjab State has filed an appeal (F. A. O. No. 86 of 1961) while the legal representatives of the deceased have questioned the sufficiency of the sum awarded and have asked for enhancement of the compensation to Rs. 50,000/- for which they had laid a claim before the Tribunal, in the separate appeal which is F. A. O. No. 89 of 1961. Sarwan Singh, Gurdev Singh and the Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company have filed an appeal (F. A. O. No. 193 of 1961) in respect of their liability which has been apportioned at one-third by the Tribunal. Civil Revision No. 617 of 1961 has been filed at the instance of the Punjab State against the compensation awarded to Yog Parkash (an appeal not being competent under Sub-section (2) of Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act for the amount in dispute is less than Rs. 2,000/-), while Civil Revision No. 721 of 1961 by the Insurance Company, on behalf of Sarwan Singh, is likewise directed against the liability imposed in respect of the injuries caused to Yog Parkash, on the truck owner.

3. So far as the facts are concerned, these do not appear to be much in dispute or doubt. The Punjab Roadways bus No. PNE 4350 started from the High Court end and after picking up fares, including Nand Kishore Tagore, from the New Secretariat, had just completed the last stretch of its route in Sector 16 when at the intersection of the roads leading to Sector 23 and the University it got struck by truck No. PNE-7324, coming at a fast speed from the side of the University. Prem-Chand, the driver of the bus, saw the truck coming from the side of the University when on his own showing he was still at a distance of 20 yards from the point of intersection. He still chose to rush through the crossing in the hope of getting clearance before the other vehicle passed that position. According to Prem Chand, he was driving at a speed of seven miles per hour, having made a slop at the New Era School which is at a distance of about 50 yards from the crossing. It was a rainy day and the road was slippery. The truck was on the main road coming from the University side and according to the statement of Gurdev Singh, the driver of the truck, its speed was 10 to 12 miles per hour. There can be no doubt that both the drivers of the bus and the truck have grossly minimised the speeds at which their vehicles were being driven. According to the evidence which has been believed by the Claims Tribunal, the truck was travelling at a spend of 30 to 40 miles per hour while the omnibus was being driven at 15 or 20 miles per hour. The occupants of the bus have given evidence to the effect that it had not stopped at New Era School, the last stoppage being at the hospital. According to the finding of the tribunal which I accept without hesitation, the story with regard to the stoppage at New Era School is an improvement and must be put aside. It has been contended by the counsel for the State of Punjab that the accident was due entirely to the negligence of the truck driver whose business it was to stop dead when he saw the omnibus comi

















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 Back to top