LexSRI DINESH KUMAR J. @ DINESH J. versus NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS .
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2017] 12 S.C.R.~99
SRI DINESH KUMAR J. @ DINESI-1 J.
I'.
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS .
.
(Ci\ ii Appeal No. 22966 of2017)
DECEMBER 15. 2017
[DIPAK l\llSRA, C.H. A.l\I. KHANWILKAR AND
DR. D.Y. CHAl\DUACH\_lD, .T.T.]
Motor Vi:liicles Acr, 1988 - MNor 11ccidi:11t - Co111pc11.rntio11
A
B
- A.ppel!allf riding 1110torcyc/e 111t'f ll'ith accidnzt 1ritlz 111i11i lorry
C
belonging to rhc second 1111d rhird respondents - Appellant Sl(/ji·red
/h'/'/11a11!'/I/ dist1/Jility - Co111putarion i~( co111pe11.rnrion at Rs. 9 lakhs
- Holl'ever. tribunal a11d High Court held t1ppc/lan1 guilty r~(
contributory neglige11ce to tire e.rte/I/ i~( ..fO'\J - Trib111111l mrnrded
Rs.5 . ..fO laklzs ilS co111pc11satio11 - High Court e1zlwnccd it ro Rs.
6 . .+6,665/- - 011 appeal. held: High Court r<'lil'd 011 tlze .fizct that D
rlzae ll'as no .risible dwnage to the lorry bw it ll'as rlze motor cycle
1\'/1id1 lzad .1'11/jiTed damage and there \\'as 110 eye-1rit1~ess - Plea if
co111ri/J11111ry negligence H'as accepted purely 011 the basis 1~{
co11ject11re and 11·ithout any el'idence - Finding of contrilmtory
negligence /raring bn-11 held to be 11'i1hout any basis, no11-
produc1ion if driring license of no rel<'l'mzce - Tl1us. the da/11ctio11
E
11( -10% lllilde 011 tlw ground 1~( conlrilmtory neglige11ce 1rirlzout
any /Jasis - Appl'lla/I/ entitled to 111/dirional w11011nf 11( Rs.-1.60 lakhs
ll'hich 1ras ll'ro11gly di.wl/01red by the courts below.
Sudhir Kumar Rana r Surinder Singh (2008) 12 SCC
436 : (2008] 7 SCR 871 - referred to.
Case Law Reference
[2008] 7 SCR 871
referred to
Pura 6
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 22966
of2017.
From the Judgment ;rnd Order dated 13.04.2016 of the High
Court of Karnmaka .it Bangalore in MFA No.3242 of2015.
499
F
G
H
500
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2017] l 2 S.C.R.
A
C.B. Gururaj, K.P. Singh, Prakash Ranjan Nayak, Advs for the
Appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
Dr. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal arises from a judgment of the High Court
B
ofKarnataka dated 13 April 2016.
3. On 18 June 2012, the appellant who was riding a motorcycle
bearing registration No.KA-04/EL-4782 met with an accident with a
mini Jorry belonging to the Second and Third respondents. The Jorry
was insured with the First respondent. As a result of the accident, the
C
appellant suffered grievous injuries. The medical certificate issued by
the Bangalore Baptist Hospital (Exhibits P-13 and P-14) indicate spinal
injuries.
4. The appellant was twenty six years of age on the date of the
accident and was working as a patroller in a private company. His income
was Rs.11,000/- per month. The appellant filed a claim for compensation
D
before the MotorAccident Claims Tribunal, seeking compensation in
the amount of Rupees 40 lakhs. The appellant adduced the evidence of
a doctor (PW 5) who deposed that the extent of permanent physical
disability of the spine was thirty four per cent. The tribunal did not accept
that the disability was thirty four per cent, noting that the doctor in his
E
cross examination admitted that he had not personally treated the appellant
and that the medical evidence did not provide a cogent determination of
the extent of disability. The Tribunal assessed the disability at ten per
cent. The income of the appellant was taken at Rs 11,000 per month and
a multiplier of seventeen was applied. 1l1e loss of income due to disability
F
was computed at Rs 2,25,000. Medical expenses were computed at Rs
3,85,000. The Tribunal computed the total compensation (including
conventional heads) at Rs 9 lakhs. However, the tribunal held that the
appellant was guilty of contributory negligence to the extent of forty per
cent and hence granted sixty per cent of Rs 9 lakhs amounting to Rs
5.40 lakhs. In appeal, the High Court has enhanced the award of medical
G
expenses by a further sum of Rs 1,77,775 on the basis of the bills produced
by the appellant. On the aspect of contributory negligence, the High
Court affirmed the finding of the tribunal. The award of compensation
of Rs 9 lakhs has been enhanced to Rs 10,77,775 and, after making a
deduction of forty per cent towards contributory negligence, the appellant
has been held entitled to an amount of Rs 6,46,665. All the respondents
H have been held to be jointly and severally liable.
SRI DINESH KUMAR {. @ DINESH J. v. · NATIONAL .
INSURANCE CO.LTp. & Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.