In Composite Negligence, Claimant Can Recover Entire Award From Any Joint Tortfeasor Individually.

On January 22, 2005, Khetabhai Karnabhai Hajani was traveling with his goods in a truck (GJ-10-V-5973) when it collided with another truck (GJ-10-T-5932)

Khetabhai sustained fatal injuries due to the accident

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jamnagar, found that both drivers were equally negligent (50:50 ratio)

However, the Tribunal observed that the deceased was a gratuitous passenger in the first truck, thereby exonerating its insurer (Oriental Insurance Co.) and primarily holding the owner of that truck liable, while the claimants sought a direction for joint and several liability against the other tortfeasors

The appellants challenged the apportionment and the exoneration of specific respondents from immediate satisfaction of the award

1. Whether, in a case of composite negligence involving two vehicles, the claimants are entitled to recover the entire compensation from any one of the joint tortfeasors

2. Whether the Insurance Company of one of the offending vehicles can be directed to satisfy the full award and subsequently recover the proportional share from the owner of the other vehicle

The court primarily applied the principle of "Composite Negligence" as interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Khenyei v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. (2015) 9 SCC 273

This principle establishes that where an accident occurs due to the negligence of more than one person, the liability of the joint tortfeasors is joint and several, and the claimant has the option to recover the full compensation from any one of them

Furthermore, the court recognized that while an insurer is not liable for a gratuitous passenger in a commercial vehicle, the owner of such vehicle remains personally liable as a joint tortfeasor

The Court noted the Tribunal's finding that the accident resulted from the composite negligence of both drivers (50% each)

Applying the Khenyei precedent, the Court reasoned that in cases of composite negligence, it is impermissible to force claimants to collect proportions of compensation from different tortfeasors; they may recover the whole amount from any one at their option

Since the Insurance Company of the second truck (Respondent No. 4) was a party to the proceedings, the Court determined it would be "just and proper" to direct Respondent No. 4 to satisfy the entire award to the claimants first

Because the first truck's insurer was exonerated due to the deceased’s status as a gratuitous passenger, the Court allowed Respondent No. 4 the right to then recover the 50% share attributable to the first truck from its owner (Respondent No. 1) through execution proceedings

It held that Respondent No. 4 (Insurance Company of the second truck) must satisfy the total compensation amount of Rs. 5,50,000/- plus 9% interest to the claimants

It further ordered that after such satisfaction, Respondent No. 4 is permitted to recover 50% of the awarded amount from Respondent No. 1 (owner of the first truck) by filing an execution petition before the Tribunal

The Tribunal was directed to disburse the amount to the claimants upon deposit, following due verification and deduction of any deficit court fees