T O ANTHONY Vs. KARVARNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The appellant was a driver working with the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. On the date of the accident, he was driving the KSRTC bus (KL 15/ 1074) from Palakkad to Trichur. When his bus was near Kannanoor a private bus (KL 9A-3456) driven by the first respondent (belonging to second respondent, and insured with third respondent) came from the opposite side and there was a head-on-collision. As a result the appellant sustained injuries including fracture of right femur. He filed a petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Palakkad claiming Rs. 2,50,000/- as compensation. By judgment and award dated 13-5-1998 the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal allowed the claim petition in part. The Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the composite negligence of drivers of both vehicles and it could not be said that the accident occurred solely due to the negligence of the first respondent. The Tribunal further held that as the accident occurred due to contributory and composite negligence of the drivers of both the vehicles, the liability should be fifty-fifty (that is 50% each). The Tribunal determined the compensation as Rs. 78,500/-. In view of its decision that the appellant was responsible for the accident, to an extent of 50%, it deducted 50% therefrom for appellants negligence, and awarded Rs. 39,250/- to the appellant with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from date of petition till date of realization, and directed the third respondent (Insurer) to pay the said amount.

(3.) Aggrieved by the said award, the appellant filed an appeal before the High Court. The High Court by judgment dated 3-3-2005 allowed the appeal in part. The High Court did not disturb the finding regarding negligence. It however increased the compensation and directed payment of an additional compensation of Rs. 39,900/-to the appellant with interest at 9% P.A. from date of petition till date of payment. Not being satisfied with the judgment of the High Court, the appellant has filed this appeal by way of Special Leave.