NASER Vs. JIJESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal,Tirur in OP(MV)No.416/2008. The claimant, a pillion rider in a vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-10X-7864, sustained injuries when hit with another vehicle KL-55-6567. The driver, owner and the insurance company of the opposite vehicle are made parties. The Tribunal found contributory negligence of 50%, assessed the compensation at Rs.31,051/= and awarded a sum of Rs.15,525/=. It is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the insurance company. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that finding of contributory negligence as well as quantum is not satisfactory and it requires interference.

(3.) Let me first consider about the negligence aspect. It is not clear from the documents produced that in which direction the vehicles were proceeding. The conduct of the claimant in fling a petition that he was riding the bike and then changing it and bringing his status to that of a pillion rider itself is a suspicious circumstance. The road was having a width of 4 metres and both the riders could have averted the accident if they had been a little careful. Nobody has tendered any oral evidence also in support of their contentions. So as held by the Supreme Court when there is a head on collision between the two vehicles, it is as a result of the composite negligence and therefore it is not incorrect to apportion the negligence at 50% each.