CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

Driving 70 Feet Long Trailer Without Any Brake Light or Tail Lamps is a Grievous Negligence: Bombay High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court has held that driving a 70 feet long trailer without brake lights or tail lamps constitutes grievous negligence. The ruling came in the case of The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Mangal Ravindra Divate and Others.

The appeal concerned the attribution of negligence in a vehicular accident under the Motor Vehicles Act, focusing on whether the absence of tail lamps and brake lights on a trailer truck contributed to a fatal accident.

The incident involved a collision between a trailer truck and a Maruti car. The truck, lacking tail lamps and brake lights, was abruptly stopped on the road at night. The car driver, unable to notice the stationary trailer, crashed into it, leading to fatal injuries. The Tribunal earlier held both drivers 50% contributively negligent.

Negligence Attributed to Trailer Truck: The High Court found that the trailer truck’s lack of brake lights and tail lamps at night significantly contributed to the accident, overturning the Tribunal’s 50-50 negligence split. Justice Shivkumar Dige observed, “Had there been tail lamps or brake lights, the deceased could have noticed that the trailer is going to stop.”

Issue of Valid Driving License: The Court dismissed the Insurance Company’s claim that the truck driver lacked a valid license due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the need for more robust proof.

Compensation Recalculation: Adjusting the Tribunal’s compensation assessment, the High Court reduced the non-pecuniary damages, recalculating the total compensation based on loss of dependency, consortium, loss of estate, and funeral expenses.

Judgment: The appeal was partially allowed. The Court granted enhanced compensation to the claimants, instructing the Insurance Company to deduct an excess amount awarded by the Tribunal and pay the remainder with interest.

Date of Decision: 12th March 2024

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Mangal Ravindra Divate and Others

Latest Legal News