Claimant in composite negligence cases may recover entire compensation from any joint tortfeasor.

On November 28, 2021, the appellant was a pillion rider on a motorcycle driven by his son. The motorcycle collided with an oncoming unknown vehicle while attempting to overtake another vehicle

The appellant sustained serious injuries and a 20% functional disability

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Morbi, awarded ₹81,800/- in compensation, attributing 50% contributory negligence to the rider of the claimant's motorcycle and 50% to the driver of the other vehicle

Because the other vehicle’s owners/insurers were not joined as parties, the Tribunal deducted 50% of the calculated award

The appellant challenged this judgment on the grounds of inadequate quantum and the improper deduction for negligence

1. Whether the Tribunal erred in deducting 50% of the compensation amount based on the non-impleadment of one of the joint tortfeasors in a case of composite negligence

2. Whether the quantum of compensation awarded was just, particularly regarding the assessment of monthly income and conventional heads of damages

The Court applied the principle of "composite negligence," referencing Khenyei v. New India Assurance Company Limited, which establishes that a claimant can recover the entire compensation from any one of the joint tortfeasors as their liability is joint and several

The Court further relied on National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi regarding future prospects and Magma General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram for awarding conventional damages

Assessment of income was governed by the minimum wage standards notified by the Government of Gujarat for the relevant period

The Court observed that as a pillion rider, no negligence could be attributed to the appellant

It reasoned that the Tribunal erred in law by deducting 50% of the award; since this was a case of composite negligence, the appellant had the legal right to seek full recovery from the impleaded insurer, who could then seek inter se contribution from other tortfeasors through execution proceedings

Regarding quantum, the Court found the Tribunal’s income assessment of ₹6,000/- per month lacked a factual basis and updated it to the prevailing minimum wage of ₹9,490/-, adding 10% for future prospects

The Court also found the awards for pain and suffering, medical expenses, and loss of income to be "meagre" and adjusted them upward to reflect the severity of the fractures and the length of treatment

The Court set aside the 50% deduction, holding that the respondent insurance company must first pay the entire awarded amount to the claimant

The insurer was granted "pay and recover" rights to seek 50% of the amount from the owner/rider of the first motorcycle (due to lack of a valid license) and the remaining 50% from the owners/insurers of the second motorcycle