Bail | Right to Speedy Trial is a Fundamental Right Under Article 21: PH High Court    |     Postal Department’s Power to Enhance Penalties Time-Barred, Rules Allahabad High Court    |     Tenants Cannot Cross-Examine Landlords Unless Relationship is Disputed: Madras High Court    |     NDPS | Conscious Possession Extends to Vehicle Drivers: Telangana High Court Upholds 10-Year Sentence in Ganja Trafficking Case    |     Aid Reduction Of Without Due Process Unlawful: Rajasthan High Court Restores Full Grants for Educational Institutions    |     Assessment of Notional Income in Absence of Proof Cannot Be 'Mathematically Precise,' Says Patna High Court    |     NCLT's Resolution Plan Overrides State Tax Claims: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Demands Against Patanjali Foods    |     An Agreement is Not Voidable if the Party Could Discover the Truth with Ordinary Diligence: Calcutta High Court Quashes Termination of LPG Distributorship License    |     Independent Witnesses Contradict Prosecution's Story: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquit Accused in Arson Case    |     Merely Being a Joint Account Holder Does Not Attract Liability Under Section 138 of NI Act:  Gujarat High Court    |     Higher Court Cannot Reappreciate Evidence Unless Perversity is Found: Himachal Pradesh High Court Refused to Enhance Maintenance    |     Perpetual Lease Allows Division of Property: Delhi High Court Affirms Partition and Validity of Purdah Wall    |     "Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Videography in Temple Premises Limited to Religious Functions: Kerala High Court Orders to Restrict Non-Religious Activities on Temple Premises    |     Past Service Must Be Counted for Pension Benefits: Jharkhand High Court Affirms Pension Rights for Daily Wage Employees    |     'Beyond Reasonable Doubt’ Does Not Mean Beyond All Doubt: Madras High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Man Convicted of Murdering Mother-in-Law    |    

If any evidence contrary to the FIR, the evidence before the Tribunal has to be given weightage over the FIR – SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The 1st Respondent–wife and the 2nd Respondent is minor son of the deceased Mr. Subhash Babu, who died in a road accident on 14.10.2013 aged about 35 years was working as Manager HR in a Private Limited Company. On the date of accident, he was driving Maruti Car– main road from Perumanallur to Erode. It is the case of the respondents–claimants that suddenly, the driver of Eicher van has turned towards right side without giving any signal or indicator. The Claims Tribunal has allowed the claim partly and awarded compensation of Rs.10,40,500/ with a finding that there was contributory negligence on the part of drivers of both the vehicles in ratio of 75 per cent and 25 per cent respectively. On appeal, the High Court by recording a finding that accident occurred only due to the negligence of the driver of the Eicher van and the annual income of the deceased was Rs.12,29,949/-, has awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,85,08,832/-. Aggrieved by the Judgement appellant filed appeal to Apex Court.  PW 1 and 2 -  the driver of Eicher van has turned towards right side without giving any signal or indicator – no evidence to rebut – held - accident occurred only due to the negligence of the driver of the Eicher van -If any evidence before the Tribunal  contrary to the contents in the First Information Report, the evidence which is recorded before the Tribunal has to be given weightage over the contents of the First Information Report. For determination - loss of dependency - assessed the income of the deceased - deceased in permanent job - age of the deceased on the date of the accident -  -the future prospects – Appeal Dismissed. 

Similar News