Deduction for contributory negligence is unsustainable if the insurer fails to lead evidence proving such negligence.

The appellant/claimant filed an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the award dated 22/11/2018 passed by the 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Mahasamund, in Claim Case No. H-28/2015

The Tribunal had calculated a total compensation of Rs. 41,571/- but deducted 50% (awarding only Rs. 20,785.50/-) on the grounds of contributory negligence by the appellant

The appellant contested the finding of contributory negligence and sought an enhancement of the compensation amount

1. Whether the Claims Tribunal was legally justified in holding the appellant liable for 50% contributory negligence in the absence of evidence led by the Insurance Company

2. Whether the compensation awarded under various heads (medical expenses, loss of income, pain and agony) was just and proper or required enhancement

The court adjudicated the matter under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

The court applied the evidentiary principle that the burden of proving contributory negligence rests upon the party asserting it (the Insurance Company).

Mere pleadings in a written statement are insufficient to establish negligence without supporting evidence

The Court observed that while Respondent No. 2 (Insurance Company) had raised the plea of contributory negligence in its written statement, it failed to lead any material evidence to substantiate the claim

The only witness produced by the insurer, a Law Officer (N.A.W-2), testified solely regarding the lack of a valid and effective driving license and provided no testimony regarding the circumstances of the accident or the claimant's negligence

Consequently, the Court found the Tribunal’s finding of contributory negligence to be erroneous due to a lack of proof

Regarding the quantum of compensation, the Court reviewed the Tribunal's awards: Rs. 31,751/- for medical expenses, Rs. 3,000/- for loss of income, Rs. 5,000/- for pain and agony, and Rs. 2,000/- for nutritional food and assistant’s fees

The Court determined these amounts to be "just and proper," concluding that no further enhancement was warranted

The Court further directed that the amount carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing the claim application until its realization. The prayer for enhancement of the compensation quantum was declined