CHENNAI: Holding a victim of motor accident (claimant) guilty of contributory negligence for not wearing helmet while riding a two-wheeler, the Madras high court has reduced Rs 50,000 from the total compensation of Rs 35.50 lakh awarded to him by the tribunal.
Passing orders on an appeal from National Insurance Company against the Tribunal’s compensation, a Division Bench comprising Justices R. Sudhakar and S. Vaidyanathan said, “This court, without interfering with the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal under each head, by reducing Rs 50,000 from the total compensation for the contributory negligence of the claimant and also for violation of Motor Vehicles Rules in respect of not wearing the helmet while riding two wheeler, modifies the compensation to Rs 35 lakh from Rs 35.50 lakh”.
According to Maniraj, on November 16, 2007, around 9 am while he was riding a two-wheeler and crossing the GST road from Chitlapakkam to enter MEPZ here, a car, driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed his two-wheeler and he suffered grievous injuries. At the time of accident, he was General Manager-Operations in Twinstar Metal Products Pvt.Ltd, MEPZ.
The doctor assessed total and permanent disability of 100 per cent. The doctor also assessed that the claimant was not able to speak, not able to take food and was now in a vegetative condition, he added and claimed Rs 48 lakh as compensation. The tribunal awarded Rs 35.50 lakh as compensation.
Aggrieved, the insurance company filed the present appeal.
Insurance company contended that the driver of the car was driving his vehicle at a moderate speed but the injured scooter rider had suddenly crossed the road resulting in the accident. The two-wheeler rider was not wearing a helmet.
The Bench said, “We are of the view that only due to the failure of the claimant to wear helmet, such grievous injuries were caused. On such reasoning, we are inclined to interfere with the award of the Tribunal and reduce a sum of '50,000 from the total compensation granted to the claimant”.
