0

The Tribunal has not committed any error in returning a finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the Trolla: HIGH COURT OF DELHI

No infirmity in the impugned award, and consequently no merit in the appeal was upheld by the HIGH COURT OF DELHI through the learned bench led by HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA  in the case of  THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs SMT SARITA NAYAK MUKHERJEE & ORS. (MAC.APP.-29/2022) on 02.03.2022.

Brief facts of the case are that the Appellant impugns award dated 11.10.2021 whereby the claim petition has been allowed and compensation awarded. Subject claim petition was filed contending that the husband of claimant No. 1, father of claimant No. 2 and the son of claimant No. 3 & 4 was going towards Shadipur Chowk from Hero Honda Chowk on his motor cycle at a normal speed wearing a helmet and on the correct side of the road. When the motor cycle crossed Hero Honda Chowk a Trolla (a long body truck) which was being driven by its driver at a very high speed rash negligently in a zig-zag manner and without applying proper lookouts and without giving any horn came from the back side and hit the motor cycle with a great force as a result of which the deceased fell on the road along with his motor cycle and the back wheel of the offending trolla passed over his head on account of which he sustained fatal crush injuries and expired on the spot.

Learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not appreciating that the deceased was himself contributory negligent and further the Tribunal has erred in not discussing the manner in which the accident has taken place in the impugned judgment. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that Tribunal has erred in awarding a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- towards ‘loss of consortium’.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/claimants submitted that the father of the deceased was a senior citizen and physically handicapped and completely dependent on the deceased and there is no cross-examination or rebuttal to the evidence led by the claimants.

The Court observed that “I am of the view that the Tribunal has not committed any error in returning a finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the Trolla which was insured with the appellant/insurance company and also with regard to the computation of income of the deceased and the dependency. Further, there is no material whatsoever to even suggest that the deceased was negligent so as to apply the principle of contributory negligence.”

The Court held that it finds no infirmity in the impugned award, and consequently no merit in the appeal.

Click here to read the Judgement

Written by- Riya SinghLegal Intern, Prime Legal

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat