{"id":318745,"date":"2024-03-30T09:00:10","date_gmt":"2024-03-30T03:30:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=318745"},"modified":"2024-04-03T11:39:03","modified_gmt":"2024-04-03T06:09:03","slug":"bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/","title":{"rendered":"Bombay HC denies contributory negligence of car which dashed trailer with no parking or tail lights"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Bombay High Court:<\/span> In an appeal against the decision of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (‘Tribunal’) considering 50% contributory negligence on the driver of the offending vehicle and 50% on the deceased, Shivkumar Dige, J. held that accident occurred due to sole negligence of the driver of the offending trailer, and accordingly enhanced the compensation amount.<\/p>\n

Factual Background<\/p>\n

The appellant – The New India Assurance Co Ltd challenged the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal which considered 50% contributory negligence on the driver of the offending vehicle and 50% contributory negligence on the deceased, while the claimant also appealed for enhancement of compensation.<\/p>\n

It was contended on behalf of the Insurance Company that the accident occurred due to sole negligence of the deceased since he gave dash to the offending vehicle from back side. It further highlighted about driver of the offending vehicle not holding effective and valid driving licenses at the time of accident, a fact allegedly not considered by the Tribunal, and that the awarded amount under the non-pecuniary head was on higher side.<\/p>\n

On the other hand, it was contended on behalf of the claimant that the offending vehicle trailer truck was 70 feet long not having parking light and brake light, whose driver suddenly stopped his trailer in the middle of the road, which led the deceased dash the trailer from its backside, sustained multiple injuries and died during treatment.<\/p>\n

Court’s Analysis<\/p>\n

The Court noted that to prove negligence of driver of offending trailer, the claimants relied on police papers, while the Insurance Company had not examined the driver of offending vehicle.<\/p>\n

The Court further took note of the facts regarding the trailer not having brake lights and tail lamps as disclosed by the spot panchnama, the time of accident being 8:30 PM, and observed that “had there been the tail lamps or brake lights, the deceased could have noticed that trailer is going to stop.” The Court accepted that there was dark and that it was not possible for the deceased to see the status of the offending trailer without tail lights or brake lights. It further highlighted that the driver of the offending trailer did not step into witness box to prove the deceased’s negligence. The Court held driving a 70 feet long trailer without any brake light or tale lamps as a grievous negligence and held the Tribunal’s decision to fix 50% contributory negligence on the deceased as erroneous. The Court further held that accident occurred due to sole negligence of the driver of the offending trailer.<\/p>\n

The Court further perused the evidence and highlighted that there was nothing on record to show that owner of the vehicle knew about driver of the offending vehicle not possessing valid and effective driving license, and the Tribunal relied on IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Geeta Devi<\/span>, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1398<\/a> to hold the Insurance Company liable to pay the compensation. The Court did not find any infirmity with the same since the RTO Officer was not examined by the Insurance Company.<\/p>\n

Coming to the amount awarded by the Tribunal as Rs.2,25,000 under non-pecuniary head, the Court referred to Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram<\/span>, (2018) 18 SCC 130<\/a> wherein it was held that each claimant is entitled for Rs.48,000\/- as consortium amount, Rs.18,000\/- for funeral expenses and Rs.18,000\/- for loss of estate. The court explained that of the amount of Rs.1,80,000, if it deducted from the amount considered by the Tribunal it comes to Rs.45,000, regarded it as excess amount and found the Insurance Company entitled for this amount.<\/p>\n

The Court accordingly enhanced the compensation amount of Rs.14,48,000@ 7.5% interest per annum and directed the Insurance Company to deposit enhanced amount after deducting Rs.45,000 from the same.<\/p>\n

[The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Mangal Ravindra Divate, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 916<\/a>, decided on 12-03-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

For Appellant:<\/span> Advocate Karishma Jhaveri; Navdeep Vora & Associates<\/p>\n

For Respondent:<\/span> Advocate Yogesh Pande<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court found driving a 70 feet long trailer without any brake light or tale lamps as a grievous negligence.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67513,"featured_media":314919,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2569,4201,30951,11661,66955,66956],"class_list":["post-318745","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-contributory-negligence","tag-mact","tag-motor-accident-claims-tribunal","tag-parking-lights","tag-tail-lights"],"yoast_head":"\nBombay HC reverses MACT order; finds sole negligence of driver of offending trailer | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Bombay High Court revered MACT order and denied contributory negligence of car which dashed the back of trailer having no parking or tail lights.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bombay HC denies contributory negligence of car which dashed trailer with no parking or tail lights\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court revered MACT order and denied contributory negligence of car which dashed the back of trailer having no parking or tail lights.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-03-30T03:30:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-04-03T06:09:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ridhi\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Bombay HC denies contributory negligence of car which dashed trailer with no parking or tail lights\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ridhi\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/\",\"name\":\"Bombay HC reverses MACT order; finds sole negligence of driver of offending trailer | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-03-30T03:30:10+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-04-03T06:09:03+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea\"},\"description\":\"Bombay High Court revered MACT order and denied contributory negligence of car which dashed the back of trailer having no parking or tail lights.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Bombay High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bombay HC denies contributory negligence of car which dashed trailer with no parking or tail lights\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea\",\"name\":\"Ridhi\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ridhi\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bombay HC reverses MACT order; finds sole negligence of driver of offending trailer | SCC Times","description":"Bombay High Court revered MACT order and denied contributory negligence of car which dashed the back of trailer having no parking or tail lights.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bombay HC denies contributory negligence of car which dashed trailer with no parking or tail lights","og_description":"Bombay High Court revered MACT order and denied contributory negligence of car which dashed the back of trailer having no parking or tail lights.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-03-30T03:30:10+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-04-03T06:09:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ridhi","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Bombay HC denies contributory negligence of car which dashed trailer with no parking or tail lights","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ridhi","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/","name":"Bombay HC reverses MACT order; finds sole negligence of driver of offending trailer | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-03-30T03:30:10+00:00","dateModified":"2024-04-03T06:09:03+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea"},"description":"Bombay High Court revered MACT order and denied contributory negligence of car which dashed the back of trailer having no parking or tail lights.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Bombay High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/30\/bombay-hc-reverses-mact-order-finds-sole-negligence-driver-offending-trailer\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bombay HC denies contributory negligence of car which dashed trailer with no parking or tail lights"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea","name":"Ridhi","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ridhi"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":331388,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/21\/vicarious-application-of-contributory-negligence-car-driver-to-passengers-reduce-compensation-sc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":318745,"position":0},"title":"Motor Accident Claim | Vicarious application of contributory negligence of car driver to the passengers, to reduce compensation is illegal: SC","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 21, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe High Court recorded an incongruous finding that if the offending truck had not been parked on the highway, the accident would not have happened even if the car was being driven at a very high speed. Therefore, the reasoning of the High Court on the issue of contributory negligence\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Vicarious application of contributory negligence to passengers","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Vicarious-application-of-contributory-negligence-to-passengers.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Vicarious-application-of-contributory-negligence-to-passengers.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Vicarious-application-of-contributory-negligence-to-passengers.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Vicarious-application-of-contributory-negligence-to-passengers.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":263097,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/04\/negligence\/","url_meta":{"origin":318745,"position":1},"title":"When a person suffers injury without any negligence on his part, but result of combined effect of negligence of two other persons: Is it a case of composite or contributory negligence? Bom HC answers","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 4, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: Expressing that, Negligence does not always mean absolute carelessness, but want of such a degree of care as required in particular circumstances,\u00a0Vinay Joshi, J., held that no absolute standard can be fixed as to what constitutes negligence differs from case to case. High Court stated that, When\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":249989,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/18\/learners-licence\/","url_meta":{"origin":318745,"position":2},"title":"Madras HC | In motor accident claims, can tribunal deduct certain percentage from compensation because rider had a learner’s license? Court answers","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 18, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: The Division Bench of Pushpa Sathyanaryana and S. Kannammal, JJ., revised the amount of compensation awarded to the claimant in a motor accident claim and enhanced it from Rs 30,89,430 to Rs 83,35,000. Instant appeal was preferred challenging the decision and decree of the Motor Accident Claims\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":238374,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/02\/mv-accident-claims-all-hc-what-is-liability-of-insurer-in-accident-case-of-contributory-as-well-as-composite-negligence-on-whom-lies-burden-of-proof-court-extrapolates\/","url_meta":{"origin":318745,"position":3},"title":"[MV Accident Claims] All HC | What is liability of insurer in accident case of contributory as well as composite negligence; on whom lies burden of proof? Court extrapolates","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 2, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court:\u00a0Dr Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J., directed the insurance company to indemnify the claimants of the deceased who died in an accident, subject, inter alia, to recovery\/deduction of 10% of the amount since the present is a case of contributory negligence. \u00a0Present appeal arose from the accident which injured\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":328340,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/08\/attempt-overtake-vehicle-motor-accident-compensation-negligence-supreme-court-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":318745,"position":4},"title":"Mere attempt to overtake vehicle not Negligence; Supreme Court enhances MACT compensation from Rs.1,01,250 to Rs.11,25,000","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 8, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Regarding appellant\u2019s attempt to overtake a vehicle, the Court stated that he was doing an act which is an everyday occurrence on the road, but resultantly suffered extensive injuries himself. Furthermore, it was proved that the offending vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"overtake vehicle not negligence supreme court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/overtake-vehicle-not-negligence-supreme-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/overtake-vehicle-not-negligence-supreme-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/overtake-vehicle-not-negligence-supreme-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/overtake-vehicle-not-negligence-supreme-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":207660,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/01\/05\/hc-cannot-exercise-jurisdiction-equivalent-to-sc-under-artice-142-to-enhance-compensation-in-mv-claims-bom-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":318745,"position":5},"title":"Bom HC | HC cannot exercise jurisdiction equivalent to SC under Artice 142 to enhance compensation in MV claims","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 5, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: The Bench of Sunil K. Kotwal, J. dismissed an appeal while modifying the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Latur (MACT). The present appeal was filed by the New India Assurance Company Ltd. - respondent 2 against the judgment and award passed by Motor Accident\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/318745","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67513"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=318745"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/318745\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314919"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=318745"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=318745"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=318745"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}