Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 16185
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B. S. Bhanumathi, J
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD – Appellant
Versus
K.ELUMALAI & 5 ORS – Respondent
Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeals Nos.3288 of 2005|902 of 2006|903 of 2006|915 of 2006|2202 of 2012
For the Appellants/Petitioners: T. S. Rayalu, V. Veerabhadra Chary
For the Respondents: O. Udaya Kumar, J. Ugranarasimha, V. Veerabhadra Chary, M. P. Chandramouli, V. Eswaraiah Chowdary, Suri Babu Puppala
In head-on collisions, liability is generally apportioned between both drivers based on contributory negligence, and findings in criminal proceedings (FIR/charge sheet) are not binding on the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for determining civil liability.
Headnote:The appeals arise from awards passed by different Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals concerning a head-on collision between a van and a lorry on 06.06.2000, which resulted in multiple fatalities and injuries. The claims were governed by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the Indian Penal Code, specifically Sections 304-A, 338, and 279. The court noted that different Tribunals had reached conflicting conclusions regarding the apportionment of liability for the same accident, ranging from joint and several liability to sole liability of the van driver. The primary issue was whether the liability should be determined solely based on the criminal record (FIR) or if contributory negligence should be applied. The court reasoned that in head-on collisions, the principle of contributory negligence generally applies to both drivers. It further held that evidence in an FIR and charge sheet is not the 'gospel truth' for the purpose of determining civil liability under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In the result, M.A.C.M.A.No.3288 of 2005 is disposed of. M.A.C.M.A.Nos.902 of 2006, 903 of 2006 and 915 of 2006 are allowed in part. M.A.C.M.A.No.2202 of 2012 is allowed in part.
M.A.C.M.A.Nos.3288 of 2005, 902, 903, 915 of 2006 and 2202 of 2012
The Court made the following common JUDGMENT:
The common case of the claimants in all cases is briefly as follows:
a. On 06.06.2000, when the deceased and the injured were travelling in a van bearing No.ATC 2399 from Renigunta to go to Tirupathi, when the van reached near Patel Timber Depot on the Renigunta - Tirupathi main road, at about 11:00 A.M., the driver of the van tried to overtake a lorry in a rash and negligent manner and at the same time, the lorry bearing No.ABC 4790 coming in the opposite direction was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and both the van and lorry collided against each other due to which Dhanapal, Kadirivan, M.Mani and P.Hari died and S.Hemamalini Devi sustained injuries. The S.H.O. of Alipiri Police Station, Tirupati registered a case in Crime No.74 of 2000 under Section 304-A , 338 and 279 I.P.C.
b. Ch. Kanakadurga is the owner and National Insurance Company Limited is the insurer of the lorry bearing No. ABC 4790. V.Mohan is the owner and Oriental Insurance Company Limited is the insurer of the van bearing No.ATC 2399.
Since all the claims arose out of the same accident, though awards were passed separately, some on same day or some on different days and some by the same or different Tribunal, to avoid conflicting findings, a common judgment is passed in all these appeals.
M.A.C.M.A.No.3288 of 2005 was filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and the decree dated 22.06.2004 in M.V.O.P.No.551 of 2000 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati.
The appellant is National Insurance Company Ltd., / respondent No.2 and the respondents Nos.1 to 4 are the claimants and the respondents Nos.5 and 7 are the respondents Nos.1 and 4 before the Tribunal. The case against the respondent No.6 was dismissed for default on 06.01.2012.
The specific case of the claimants is briefly as follows:
The claimant No.1 was the wife and the claimants Nos.2 to 4 are minor children of Dhanapal (herein after referred as ‘deceased’). The deceased was aged about 44 years and earning Rs.6,900/- per month as Grade II Technician in South Central Railway, Tirupati and contributing the same to his family. The claimants alone are the dependents on his earnings. The respondent No.3 is the owner and the respondent No.4 is the insurer of the van. Therefore, the claimants seek compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- payable by all the respondents with joint and several liability.
On behalf of the claimants, P.W.1 / claimant No.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 were marked as evidence. On behalf of the respondents, a copy of insurance policy of the lorry bearing No.ABC 4790 was marked as Ex.B1.
After evaluating the evidence, the Tribunal found that the drivers of both the vehicles contributed in negligently causing the accident and negligence was apportioned as 30% : 70% between the drivers of the lorry and the van respectively. The Tribunal assessed income of the deceased at Rs.6,900/- per month and after deducting 1/3 rd of it, his annual contribution to the family was assessed at Rs.4,600/-. Since the deceased was found to be aged about 46 years, by applying multiplier ‘13’, the compensation towards loss of earnings was calculated as Rs.7,17,600/-. In addition thereto, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium; Rs.25,000/- towards loss of estate and guidance to the claimants Nos.2 to 4; and Rs.15,000/- was awarded towards loss of love and affection. Thus, in total, Rs.7,72,600/- was awarded. Interest was granted @ 9% p.a. payable from the date of filing of the petition till the date of realization. The liability was fastened on all the respondents with joint and several liability, however at the rate of 30% : 70% as indicated above.
M.A.C.M.A.No.902 of 2006 was filed under Section 173 o
