KULDIP SINGH Vs. GURMAIL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claimant Kuldip Singh Kohli sustained multiple injuries when, while driving his motor cycle, he was involved in an accident with a truck. This happened at Jalandhar on June 27,1975. The accident here occurred at the road inter-section of Rainbow Road and the Road from the market to the Gurudwara in Model Town, Jalandhar. The claimant had come on to this crossing from the Rainbow Road and it was his version that he had almost gone across it when the truck came from the side of the market at a very fast speed and hit into his moter cycle. The respondents, however, denied any negligence on the part of the truck driver.

(2.) The tribunal came to the finding that this was a case of contributory negligence with the claimant being largely to blame for it. The liability of the truck driver was consequently assessed at only ten per cent. On this basis a sum of Rs. 800/- was awarded as compensation to the claimant for the injuries suffered by him in this accident.

(3.) There can be no manner of doubt that this was indeed a case of contributory negligence. The accident here had occurred at a road intersection. A reading of the evidence of the claimant Kuldip Kohli and his witnesses P. W. 1 Mohinder Kumar, P. W. 2 Parmod Kumar and P. W. 3 Paramjit Singh with that of the truck driver R. W. 1 Gurmail Singh would show that in the situation the provisions of both Regulations 6 and 7 of the 10th Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act were clearly attracted. Regulation 6 casts a duty upon the driver of a motor vehicle to slow down while approaching a road inter-section and to proceed to enter it only when he can do so with safety. The evidence on record in this case would suggest that neither vehicle slowed down while approaching this inter-section and at any rate neither the claimant nor the truck driver cared to see whether it was safe to go on to the crossing before actually proceeding to do so. The requirements of this Regulation were thus wholly disregarded by both the drivers. As regards the claimant, it must also be held that he disregarded the requirements of Regulation 7 too which required him to give way to the traffic approaching from his right hand side. The truck here admittedly came from that side and it was thus incumbent upon him to give right of way, to the truck. These being the circumstances there is no escape from the conclusion that the major share of the blame for the accident must lie with the claimant himself which in the circumstances deserves to be assessed at two third. The truck driver being partly responsible to the extent of remaining one third on account of the non observance by him of requirements of Regulation 6. The finding of the Tribunal on the issue of negligence is consequently modified to this extent.