POONCHOLAI Vs. SANJEEVI REDDIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal has been preferred by the appellant/claimant questioning the contributory negligence decided against him and the quantum of compensation. On 25.10.1997, the appellant/claimant was driving his lorry which belongs to the first respondent towards vazhapadi from Salem. At that time, the lorry belonging to the third respondent coming in the opposite direction, driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the claimant's lorry. Due to the said accident, the petitioner sustained grievous injuries leading to amputation of his right leg. The appellant/claimant filed a petition for compensation of Rs.6,00,000/ -.

(2.) THE fourth respondent as insurer of the third respondent filed a counter statement stating that the appellant/claimant alone was negligent and he alone was charge sheeted by the Police.

(3.) MR .R.Sunil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimant would submit that fixing 50% negligence on the part of the appellant/claimant is unwarranted as there is no contra evidence available to the claimant's evidence. He further relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court inUsha Rajkhowa and others Vs. Paramount Industries and others reported in 2009 14 Supreme Court Cases 71 and in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Sinitha and others reported in(2012) 2 Supreme Court Cases 356, submittedthat the onus of proof of contributory negligence lies on the Insurer. Therefore, in the absence of any contra evidence, contributory negligence should not have been fastened on the appellant/claimant.