UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. CHENDRI RAMAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Common question of law arises in these three appeals relating to dependants of three persons who died in Motor Accident who were making triple riding of Hero Honda motor cycle. The accident took place on 30.08.2004 at about 8.40 P.M near H.P. petrol pump in the limits of Muthangi on national highway No. 9, when three deceased persons were making triple riding on Hero Honda motor cycle bearing No. AP 23 F 8989. D.C.M van bearing No. AP 23 v. 2075 came in the opposite direction and dashed the motor cycle resulting in spot death of three riders of the motor cycle.

(2.) The only contention put forward by the Appellant's counsel before this Court is that triple riding is prohibited under Section 128 of the Motor Vehicles Act and is punishable and that triple riding on motor cycle meant for riding only two persons, causes discomfort and inconvenience for the rider/driver of the motor cycle for want of space and there will be cramping resulting in lack of proper control on the motor cycle. The Appellant's counsel placed reliance on United India Insurnace Co., Ltd., V.K. Anjaiah, 2004 4 ALD 444 of this Court in support of his contention that because of triple riding there will be contributory negligence on the part of driver of the motor cycle. It was held therein that in such case 25% of the compensation has to be disallowed towards contributory negligence on the part of the motor cycle rider. This Court rendered the said decision on probabilities and presumptions by absolving as follows:

(3.) On the other hand, the claimants' counsel placed reliance on G. Pitchaiah Naidu V. A.P.S.E.B, Madakaira, 2000 1 ALD 239 of this Court. Both these reported decisions were rendered by one and the same learned Judge. In G. Pitchaiah Naidu, this Court held that when driver of the lorry was found to be rash and negligent in driving the vehicle, he cannot plead contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the motor cycle on the ground that he was taking two pillion riders and he had no driving licence. This Court observed therein: