Contributory negligence cannot be presumed from law violations unless evidence links the violation to the accident's cause or severity.

JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP JAIN, J.

1. The instant appeal under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988 has been preferred by the insurer of vehicle Mahindra Tractor No. UP-11-BJ- 5905 against the impugned judgment and award dated 27.06.2025 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Saharanpur, whereby compensation of Rs.66,036/- alongwith interest @ 7% per annum has been awarded in favour of minor claimant (Rocky) for the injuries suffered by him in an accident which occurred on 27.02.2021.

2. Factual matrix is that the injured Rocky, aged about 7 years was travelling with his minor sister Ishani, aged about 8 years and parents on a motorcycle on 27.02.2021 at about 3:00 p.m., a Mahindra Tractor No. UP-11-BJ-5905, which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind and hit the above motorcycle, resulting in injuries to the minor children, father and death of the claimant’s mother. In this accident, the claimant’s left leg was fractured and he sustained injuries on other parts of his body. Besides this, the claimant’s minor sister was seriously injured and his mother Smt. Shabnam was grievously injured, who succumbed to her injuries and died on 13.03.2021.

3. An F.I.R. was registered on 03.03.2021 at 19:33 hours being Case Crime No.81 of 2021 at PS-Sarsawa, District Saharanpur, against the driver Anil Saini of the above tractor No. UP-11-BJ-5905 in which after investigation, a charge sheet has been submitted against the above driver.

4. The owner of the tractor appeared before the Tribunal and denied the accident but also pleaded that the accident took place due to the sole negligence of the above motorcycle driver. The Insurance Company also submitted its written statement, in which it denied the accident. Before the Tribunal, the claimant’s father Sanjay Kumar examined himself as PW-1 and the owner-cum-driver of the offending tractor Anil Kumar examined himself as DW-1. No oral and documentary evidence was adduced by the Insurance Company before the Tribunal.

5. In these circumstances, the Tribunal concluded that the accident occurred due to the sole negligence of the above tractor driver and as such, for the injuries sustained in the accident, the claimant was awarded compensation of Rs.66,036/- along with interest @7% per annum, which was ordered to be indemnified by the insurer of the above tractor.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant, who is the insurer of the above offending tractor, submitted that on the date of the alleged accident, the claimant was travelling along with his minor sister and parents on the motorcycle. Learned counsel submitted that four persons were travelling on the motorcycle, the accident occurred because the motorcycle driver failed to balance the motorcycle resulting in the collision. Learned counsel also submitted that the tractor was insured for agricultural purposes but was used for commercial purposes, as such, there was breach of policy conditions and in such situation, the Insurance Company was not liable to indemnify the claimant.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.

8. The Apex Court in the case of Mohammed Siddique & Another vs. National Insurance Company Limited & Others (2020) 3 SCC 57 held as under:-

"12. But the above reason, in our view, is flawed. The fact that the deceased was riding on a motorcycle along with the driver and another, may not, by itself, without anything more, make him guilty of contributory negligence. At the most, it would make him guilty of being a party to the violation of the law. Se