K M MAHIN Vs. SUBAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since both the above appeals arose from a common award, they are considered together and disposed of accordingly.

(2.) The 2nd respondent remained ex parte and the 1 st respondent filed written statement disputing the negligence attributed against the 2nd respondent. According to him, the 2nd respondent was having valid driving licence and badge at the time of accident. He disputed the quantum of compensation claimed under various heads of claim.

(3.) The 3rd respondent filed written statement in both the petitions denying the allegation of rash and negligence attributed against the 2nd respondent. According to the 3rd respondent, the accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the motorcycle, the petitioner in O.P.(MV) No.189 of 2005 and he was riding the motorcycle without holding a driving licence and without wearing a protective headwear, as required under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. So, he also contributed to the cause of accident and thereby the principles of composite negligence would come into play, in the instant case. The 3rd respondent also disputed the quantum of compensation claimed under various heads of claim. Violation of policy condition was also alleged.