Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court Ban Junk Food Within 50 Metres Of Schools: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance To Enforce FSSAI Norms, Protect Children From Obesity

Where one party's negligence places another in danger, forcing that other to act quickly to save himself, this does not constitute contributory negligence – SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In this case, husband of the 1st appellant was travelling, dashed against a lorry that was going in front, when the driver of the lorry allegedly stopped it suddenly without any signal or indicator. The victim suffered serious injuries and died on the spot. On the issue relating to the cause of the accident, the Tribunal concluded as per police records that the lorry into which the car collided, had been parked without putting any indicator or signal on NH­4. But at the same time the Tribunal concluded, based on the final report filed by the police against the drivers of the lorry as well as the car, that the driver of the car was also equally negligent.  Therefore, the Tribunal first held that the accident occurred due to the contributory negligence on the part of the drivers of both vehicles and fixed 50% as the factor of contribution. Since the Tribunal held the driver of the car equally negligent contributing to the accident, the Tribunal divided the aforesaid amount by two and awarded a compensation of Rs.16,72,800/­. Aggrieved by the order Appellants approached the High Court but order of Tribunal was upheld by the High Court. Appellants approached the Apex Court. Appellants claim in the finding of contributory negligence is arbitrary and unjustified and (ii) that the Tribunal and High Court failed to consider the appellants' prospects considering the law laid down in. There was nothing on record to indicate that the driver of the car was not driving at moderate speed nor that he did not follow traffic rules. On the second question, the Tribunal merely allowed 10% as additional weightage, for the reason that the deceased had a bright future. Apex Court held that while determining the income, an addition of 50% of actual salary to the income of the deceased towards future prospects. Appeal Allowed.

October 06, 2021

SMT. K. ANUSHA & ORS. VERSUS  REGIONAL MANAGER, SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.

Latest Legal News