SC: Overtaking A Vehicle Everyday Occurrence on Road, Can't Be Termed Negligence

The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices C T Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol revised the compensation to the sum of Rs 11.25 lakh as against Rs 1,01,250 awarded to Prem Lal Anand and others by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

New Delhi:The Supreme Court has said that a person merely attempting to overtake a vehicle, cannot be said to be committing an act of rashness or negligence, while enhancing compensation, in a road accident case, from Rs 1.01 lakh to 11.25 lakh.

A bench comprising Justices C T Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol said, "In the attending facts and circumstances, merely because a person was attempting to overtake a vehicle, cannot be said to be an act of rashness or negligence with nothing to the contrary suggested from the record. Further, it is the claimant-appellant(s) who lost a member of their family".

The bench noted that not only was the claimant-appellant, Prem Lal Anand doing an act which is an everyday occurrence on the road that is overtaking a vehicle, but resultantly suffered extensive injuries himself.

"That apart, it has also been proved that the offending vehicle was driven rashly and negligently. These two factors taken together lead us to the conclusion that the finding of contributory negligence against the appellant No.1 was erroneous and unjustified. Consequently, compensation awarded on this count has to be revised," said the bench, in a judgment delivered on Wednesday.

The apex court revised the compensation to the sum of Rs 11.25 lakh as against Rs 1,01,250 awarded to Prem Lal Anand and others by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The top court said the record reveals that driver of the tractor number UP 14-A 1933 had maintained slow speed, prompting the claimant-appellant to overtake, but, however, the driver of another tractor bearing number UP 14-B 9603 was rash and negligent in his act, in as much as, not only did he overspeed, but also came from the wrong side, resulting in the collision.

The primary ground on which compensation was truncated was based on the finding of contributory negligence recorded by the tribunal. The tribunal said the responsibility for the accident could be apportioned to both the claimant-appellants and the respondent at 50 per cent each.

The claimant-appellant No.1 Anand along with his wife aged about 45 years were travelling by motorcycle and as they were crossing village Mehrauli, on their way to Noida to visit a friend, they were faced with two rashly and speedily driven tractors resulting into an accident, with the claimant sustaining several injuries including a broken jaw and fracture(s) in his leg. Unfortunately, claimant-appellant’s wife died on the spot, as a result of the impact of the accident.

The couple were engaged in business jointly earning Rs 5,000 from their business concern. It was urged that due to the sudden death of the wife of the deceased, the entire business, which was earning profits, for example, Rs.60,000/- in the year 1994 and Rs.50,000/- in 1993, the income therefrom was lost. Hence, the claimants, being legal heirs of the deceased, filed a claim for Rs 12,00,000 before the concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

Read More