Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
SMT. INDRANI RAJA DURAI & ORS.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
MADRAS MOTOR & GENERAL INSURANCECOMPANY & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16/01/1996
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
G.B. PATTANAIK (J)
CITATION:
1996 SCC (2) 157 JT 1996 (1) 586
1996 SCALE (1)563
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
This appeal by special leave arises from the order
dated June 14, 1971 of he Division Bench of the High Court
of Madras in Appeal against Order No. 34 and 174 and 1973.
The facts are fairly clear.
On April 4, 1971, while the deceased Rajadurai was
driving the motor cycle from western direction to eastern
direction on the National Highway Madras to Bangalore at
Kathur Junction, a motor vehicle had come in between. As a
consequence, he had taken extreme right to save his life.
Consequently, the but his the motor cycle. As a result of
which he died on the spot. The appellants are the widow and
the children of the deceased who was aged about 31 years.
The finding of the Tribunal is that the deceased was earning
Rs. 800/- per month. On that basis the Tribunal awarded a
sum of Rs. 1 lakh. The Tribunal held that there was a
contributory negligence. On that basis, after giving the
benefit of contributory negligence it fixed the amount at s.
1 lakh. The High Court reversed the finding on the ground
that the diver of the bust was not negligent. The entire
negligence was on the part of the deceased. As a
consequence, the appellants are not entitled to the
compensation. Thus this appeal by special leave.
We have scanned the evidence and reasoning of the High
Court and the Tribunal. Unfortunately, the High Court has
not considered the evidence from the proper perspective.
Since the driver of the bus equally was driving at high
speed, greater care was required of him to see that no
accident took place. It would appear from the circumstances
that the deceased, with a view to save himself from being
sandwiched between the car and the bus, had taken to the
extreme right. As a consequence, he hit the left bumper of
the bus. It would thus be clear that the driver of the bus
equally contributed to the accident. On the facts and
circumstances. We think that negligence can be apportioned
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
as 60% and 40%. As a consequence, the respondent is liable
to pay compensation of Rs. 60,000/- and Rs. 40,000/- would
be foregone by the appellants. Under these circumstances,
the order of the High Court is set aside. The order of the
Tribunal is also modified. The appellants a entitled to a
sum of Rs. 60,000/- with interest at 60% from the date of
the judgment of the Tribunal dated November 30, 1972. It
would appear that the original Insurance Company which
insured the vehicle having been taken over by the United
India Insurance Company, which is a nationalized company, is
liable to pay proportionately to the extent of the insurance
cover. The appellants are entitled to recover the amount
from the Company and the balance from the owner.
The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.