The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of principles of negligence and contributory negligence in motor accident cases, along with the determination of compensation for future loss of income and non-pecuniary damages.

JUDGMENT :

Ajai Tyagi, J.

1. By way of this appeal, the claimants have challenged the judgment and order dated 27.07.2015 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.6, Kanpur Nagar (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C.P. No. 103 of 2012 awarding sum of Rs.10,09,500/- as compensation to the claimants with interest at the rate of 7% per annum.

2. Heard Mr. Anurag Singh, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Anubhav Sinha, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the record.

3. Brief facts of the case are that a claim petition is filed before Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') with the averments that on 21.10.2011, the deceased was returning from his brick kiln to his house in Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur by his Innova car bearing No. UP78CE4408. When he reached between Shambhua railway crossing and village Hadaha, a truck bearing No. UP78N5859, which was being driven very rashly and negligently by its driver, hit the Innova car from opposite direction. In this accident, the deceased Sheel Sachan sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. First information report of this accident was lodged in the concerned police station. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the driver of the aforesaid offending truck. Learned Tribunal held the drivers of both the vehicles negligent to the tune of 50 % each and awarded Rs. 10,09,500/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 7 % per annum. Aggrieved with the quantum of award and finding of contributory negligence, this appeal has been filed by the appellants.

4. The accident is not in dispute. The liability of insurance company to pay the compensation is also not disputed but the finding of contributory negligence is challenged by the appellants. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that at the time of the accident, the deceased was not at fault and the accident had taken place due to sole negligence of the truck driver.

5. The term 'negligence' means failure to exercise care towards others which a reasonable and prudent person would in a circumstance or taking action which such a reasonable person would not. Negligence can be both intentional or accidental which is normally accidental. More particularly, it connotes reckless driving and the injured must always prove that the either side is negligent. If the injury rather death is caused by something owned or controlled by the negligent party then he is directly liable otherwise the principle of "res ipsa loquitur" meaning thereby "the things speak for itself" would apply.

6. The principle of contributory negligence has been discussed time and again. A person who either contributes or author of the accident would be liable for his contribution to the accident having taken place.

7. The Division Bench of this Court in First Appeal From Order No. 1818 of 2012 (Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Renu Singh And Others) decided on 19.7.2016 has held as under :

"16. Negligence means failure to exercise required degree of care and caution expected of a prudent driver. Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon the considerations, which ordinarily regulate conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. Negligence is not always a question of direct evidence. It is an inference to be drawn from proved facts. Negligence is not an absolute term, but is a relative one. It is rather a comparative term. What may be negligence in one case may not be so in another. Where there is no duty to exercise care, negligence in the popular sense has no legal consequence. Where there is a duty to exercise care, reasonable care must be taken to avoid acts or omissions which would be reasonably foreseen likely to caused physical injury to perso