Stationary vehicle on highway without indicators shifts primary liability for contributory negligence to the driver.

On November 8, 2012, Jashwantsinh Pratapsinh Rawat (the deceased) died after his motorcycle collided with the rear of a truck parked in the middle of the road without indicators or reflectors at night.

The claimants filed a petition under the Motor Vehicles Act seeking ₹15,00,000 in compensation.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Ankalesvar, computed the total compensation at ₹7,06,400 but deducted 80% for the deceased's contributory negligence, awarding only ₹1,41,280.

The claimants appealed to the High Court challenging both the finding on negligence and the quantum of compensation.

1. Whether the Tribunal erred in attributing 80% contributory negligence to the deceased motorcycle rider for a collision with a stationary truck parked in the middle of the road at night.

2. Whether the assessment of the deceased's income and the compensation awarded under conventional heads were just and in accordance with established legal principles.

The court applied Sections 121, 122, 126, and 127 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, regarding the duties and prohibitions related to parking vehicles on highways.

Calculation of quantum relied on National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) regarding future prospects (40% for age 34) and standardized amounts for conventional heads.

Application of Magma General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Ors. (2018) regarding the entitlement of all legal heirs to parental and filial consortium.

The Court observed that the FIR and panchnama proved the truck was parked in the middle of the road at night without indicators or obstructions, violating statutory traffic rules.

The Court held that the truck driver contributed more significantly to the accident, reversing the Tribunal's ratio to hold the truck driver 80% negligent and the deceased 20% negligent.

Since income was not proved by cogent evidence, the Court applied the minimum wage for skilled workers in Gujarat at the time (₹4,880, rounded to ₹5,000).

The Court adjusted the calculation by adding 40% for future prospects and deducting 1/4th for personal expenses given the five dependents.

The Court corrected the consortium award by providing ₹40,000 (plus 10% increment) to each of the five dependents, totaling ₹2,42,000.

The Court ordered the Insurance Company to deposit the additional amount of ₹8,87,760 with 9% interest per annum from the date of the claim petition until realization.