The main legal point established is that mere triple riding on a motorcycle, without further proof of negligence contributing to the accident, is not sufficient to hold the occupants of the motorcycle as contributory negligent.

Darshan Singh, J.

CM-12367-CII-2014 in FAO-4248-2014

1. There is delay of 121 days in filing the present appeal. The appellant has filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 151 CPC for condonation of delay.

2. Heard on the application.

3. In view of the reasons mentioned in the application, same is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.

Main Appeals

1. This judgment of mine shall dispose of all the appeals mentioned above, which have been preferred by the appellants-claimants against the common award dated 07.10.2013 passed by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Fatehabad (hereinafter called the 'Tribunal'), vide which 50% of the compensation amount has been deducted towards negligence of the appellants-claimants.

2. The facts of the case are that on 03.04.2012 Smt.Shakuntla Devi appellant-claimant accompanied by her brother-inlaw Mandeep Kumar alias Deepu and aunt Bimla Devi were proceeding towards Dhani Binja Lamba from Fatehabad on motorcycle bearing registration No.HR-22F-7776 being driven by appellant-claimant Mandeep Kumar. The said vehicle was being driven on the left side of the road by observing all the traffic rules. At about 03:15 p.m., when they reached near village Ayalki at `T' point Boswal, then a bus bearing registration No.HR-62-1501 being driven by respondent No.1 Surjeet Singh came from behind and struck the motorcycle. Due to its impact, all the three occupants of the motor cycle fell down and suffered multiple injuries on various parts of their body. The criminal case for this accident was registered bearing FIR No.170 dated 03.04.2012 under sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code against respondent No.1 at Police Station Sadar Fatehabad.

3. Appellant-claimant Jai Ram was the passenger travelling in the bus. He also suffered the injuries. All of them have filed the separate four claim petitions for grant of compensation for the injuries suffered by them.

4. The learned Tribunal held that the motorcycle in question was being driven by Mandeep Singh alias Deepu in violation of Section 128 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter called the 'Act') with two passengers on the pillion. Thus, he held that it was a case of contributory negligence on the part of the occupants of ill fated vehicles and that of respondent No.1 in the ratio of 50% each. The learned Tribunal has computed the amount of compensation payable to Smt.Shakuntla the appellant of FAO No.5200 of 2014 to be Rs. 93,333/-, to Mandeep Singh alias Deepu the appellant of FAO No.5712 of 2014 to be Rs. 51,025/-, to Smt. Bimla the appellant of FAO No.4248 of 2014 to be Rs. 5000/- and the compensation payable to Jai Ram the appellant of FAO No.5201 of 2014 to be Rs. 97,955/- and further held that they will be entitled to 50% of the aforesaid amounts as compensation, obviously due to the alleged contributory negligence.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that appellant Jai Singh was not travelling on the motorcycle. He was the passenger travelling in the bus. He further contended that mere this fact that three persons were riding on the motorcycle is also no ground to held them contributory negligent. The triple riding on a two wheeler may be a traffic offence but it does not constitute the contributory negligence. To support his contentions, he relied upon cases The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. T.K. Duraiswamy and another 2011 ACJ 2532, Smt. D.Vasheeda & others v. Smt. V. Babakka & others 2013(8) RCR (Civil) 344, Kumari K. Pushpa Latha and another v. E. Murali Manohar Rao and another 2014, ACJ 640 and Karnail Singh v. Balwinder Singh 2013(1) PLR 774.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent- Insurance Company contended that there is no defect in the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal that triple riding on the motorcycle is prohibited under the provisions of the Act. He further contended that if three persons are riding on the motorcycle, w