Mere alcohol consumption does not establish contributory negligence in a motor accident claim.

The claimants sought compensation for the death of Shaik Nausher Ahmed in a road accident involving his motorcycle and a car insured by the appellant.

The Tribunal held the car driver solely negligent and awarded ₹29,09,600, with interest at 6% per annum, excluding interest on the future-prospects component.

The insurer appealed, contending that the deceased’s alleged alcohol consumption—forming the basis of a charge under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act—warranted a finding of contributory negligence.

Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the car driver was entirely responsible for the accident.

The Court considered Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, under which the deceased had been charged, and the charge sheet’s allegations under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the IPC against the car driver.

The deceased’s alleged consumption of alcohol, without evidence connecting it to the cause of the accident, does not by itself establish contributory negligence.

The charge sheet attributed rash and negligent driving to the car driver, not to the deceased.

The accident sketch showed that the car driver turned right and entered the road on which the deceased was travelling straight, causing the motorcycle to collide with the car.

The Court held that the allegation of alcohol consumption did not establish that the deceased contributed to the collision; accordingly, the evidence supported the Tribunal’s finding of sole negligence on the car driver’s part.

It ordered the amount deposited in the appeal to be transmitted to the Tribunal.