Today, On 7th August, The Supreme Court ruled that merely attempting to overtake a vehicle does not constitute rashness or negligence. In a case where a claimant lost his wife in an accident involving an over-speeding tractor during an overtaking attempt, the court increased the compensation awarded.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court, On Wednesday, ruled that merely attempting to overtake a vehicle cannot be deemed an act of rashness or negligence.
A Bench comprising Justices CT Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol decided to increase the compensation awarded to a claimant involved in a motor accident case.
Read Also: Madras High Court Initiates “Conveyor Belt-Like Mechanism” to Reform Rash Young Drivers
The incident, which occurred in 1994, involved the claimant colliding with an over speeding tractor that traveling on the wrong side of the road as he attempted to overtake another tractor. Tragically, the claimant’s wife, who was riding with him on the motorcycle, died as a result of the accident.
The Court noted,
“The record reveals that the driver of tractor No. UP 14-A 1933 had maintained a slow speed, prompting the claimant-appellant No.1 to overtake. However, the driver of the other tractor, bearing No. UP 14-B 9603, was rash and negligent in his actions, as he was not only over speeding but also coming from the wrong side, leading to the collision. Given these facts and circumstances, merely attempting to overtake a vehicle cannot be considered an act of rashness or negligence, with no evidence to the contrary suggested from the record,”
The Supreme Court hearing an appeal against a ruling by the Allahabad High Court, which had upheld a decision by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT).
The MACT determined that both the claimant and the driver of the over speeding tractor equally at fault for the accident. Consequently, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.1,01,250 with 8 percent interest.
Considering that the claimant’s wife died in the accident, the Supreme Court concluded that the over speeding tractor driven rashly and negligently. Therefore, attributing contributory negligence to the claimant deemed unjustified.
Read Also: Punjab and Haryana High Court Rejects Compromise, Affirms Advocacy for Animal Rights
The Court observed,
“It is the claimant-appellant(s) who lost a member of their family. Not only was the claimant-appellant, Prem Lal Anand, performing a common road activity overtaking a vehicle but he also suffered extensive injuries himself. Moreover, it has been established that the offending vehicle was driven rashly and negligently. These two factors lead us to conclude that the finding of contributory negligence against appellant No.1 was erroneous and unjustified,”
As a result, the Court increased the compensation amount to Rs. 11,25,000, with 12 percent interest.
Advocates Praveen Chaturvedi and Shashindra Tripathi represented the claimant, while Advocates Sunny Choudhary, Deepak Raj, Wishwa Pratap, AK De, Ananya De, Rameshwar Prasad Pandey, Rebecca Das, and Shiv Sagar Tiwari represented the respondents.
Read Judgment: [Prem Lal Anand and Others v. Narendra Kumar and Others].