THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs. MALLAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals coming up for orders on interlocutory applications viz., seeking dispensation, for condonation of delay and for stay of operation of the judgment and award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The applications do not merit consideration as the appeals which are all filed on a common ground that the Tribunal has failed to address the aspect of contributory negligence on the part of one of the vehicles involved in the accident - the appeals are considered for final disposal.

(2.) It is to be noticed that the appellant is common in these appeals. The appellant is a road transport corporation seeking to question the common judgment whereby the claims of several passengers of a bus belonging to the appellant which had collided with a truck and as a result of which the several claimants having been injured had laid claim for compensation. That having been contested, was allowed by the Tribunal awarding various amounts of compensation in respect of the several claimants, which is sought to be questioned in these appeals, on the primary ground that there was contributory negligence on the part of the truck involved in the accident and therefore, the entire liability being fastened on the appellant was not proper and that it has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

(3.) The claimants, as can be seen were all passengers in the bus and it would not be relevant whether there was contributory negligence on the part of the other vehicle involved in the accident. In so far as they are concerned, it is a case of composite negligence whereby the claimants are enabled to lay claim either on any one of the owners of the vehicles or on both the owners of the vehicles, involved in the accident. The degree of contributory negligence is also not relevant in such a case. Hence, even if the contributory negligence on the part of the truck involved in the accident was substantial, it would still not absolve the liability of the appellant in satisfying the claim.