Failure to wear a helmet warranted 10% contributory negligence for fatal head injuries.

The deceased, Palanisamy, died after his motorcycle collided with a crane on 8 September 2018.

His wife and children claimed compensation under Section 166(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, alleging negligent driving by the crane driver.

The Tribunal found the crane driver solely responsible and awarded Rs.12,80,044.

The insurer appealed, challenging negligence and liability, and sought to introduce the insurance policy, the driver’s licence and the vehicle’s registration certificate as additional evidence.

The High Court also considered whether the deceased’s failure to wear a helmet warranted a finding of contributory negligence.

Section 166(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, provides the basis for a claim for compensation arising from a motor accident; Section 173 provides for an appeal against a Claims Tribunal’s award.

Under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC, additional evidence may be admitted in appeal only where the rule’s conditions are satisfied, including that, despite due diligence, the evidence was not available or could not be produced before the decree.

The judgment also applied the principle of contributory negligence in assessing whether a claimant’s own conduct contributed to the injury or loss.

It identified the applicable Motor Accident Rules as requiring helmet use, but cited no specific rule or precedent.

The Court held that the insurer had not proved the licence defence: although the Motor Vehicle Inspection Report recorded that the licence was not produced for inspection, the claimants had produced a copy of the driver’s licence, and the insurer did not call an RTO official or other independent witness to substantiate its objection.

The Court rejected the additional-evidence application because the insurer had not satisfied Order XLI Rule 27 CPC.

On contributory negligence, it relied on the evidence of head injuries and concluded that wearing a helmet could have avoided or reduced their severity; it therefore attributed 10% contributory negligence to the deceased and 90% to the crane driver.

It reduced the Tribunal’s award by 10%.

The Court attributed 10% contributory negligence to the deceased for not wearing a helmet and reduced the compensation from Rs.12,80,044 to Rs.11,52,000.

The insurer was directed to deposit the modified award with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition, less any amount already deposited, within six weeks; the Tribunal’s other directions remained unchanged.