U.P. State Road Transport ... V. Smt.

Rajani And Ors. 2007 (2) AWC

1867
Allahabad High Court
U.P. State Road Transport ... vs Smt. Rajani And Ors. on 16 March, 2007
Equivalent citations: 2007 (2) AWC 1867
Bench: V Sahai, S Yadav
JUDGMENT V.M. Sahai and Sabhajeet Yadav, JJ.

Introduction

The case at hand named, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation V. Smt. Rajani and Others,
is an appeal-based case which was filed under section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
against the judgement and award passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bulandshahr.
It is a motor accident case in which the principles of contributory negligence, composite
negligence and joint & several liability have been touched upon.

Background and Facts of the Case

 Surendra Kumar Garg died in a car accident on Sikandrabad road in Bulandshahr on

22.9.1988, involving car D.B.A. 1695 and Bus U.G.U. 7164.
 The widow, son, and daughter of the deceased filed a compensation claim of Rs.
17,24,000, which was uncontested by the car owner but disputed by U.P. Road Transport
Corporation.
 U.P. Road Transport Corporation claimed the car had overtaken a tempo wrongly, causing
the accident. The Tribunal framed issues, including determining if the bus driver was rash
and negligent.
 The Tribunal found contributory negligence of both drivers, attributing 50% liability to
each for the accident.
 For compensation, the Tribunal considered the deceased's age, monthly salary, and
dependents, applying a multiplier of 15. After deductions, the final compensation awarded
was Rs. 2,97,100.
 U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and the car owner were jointly and severally held
liable for 50% each of the compensation. The claimants could recover it jointly or
severally from either party. U.P.S.R.T.C. appealed this decision.
 Issues:

Whether in case of a motor accident caused due to composite negligence of the drivers of two
or more vehicles, the person who is injured or legal representatives of the deceased in such an
accident are entitled to claim the entire amount of compensation from all or any of the
drivers, owners or insurers of the vehicles involved in the accident;
Or
Whether in such a case, the injured or legal representatives of the deceased can recover only
that part of the compensation from each set of driver, owner or insurer which is proportionate
to the quantum of negligence of that driver, which contributed to the accident?

Arguments

• Counsel for the appellant has urged that in given facts and circumstances of the
case, the driver of the bus and appellant as the owner of the bus could not be held to
be joint tortfeasor so as to become jointly and severally liable for the damage caused
instead thereof at the most could be held liable to the extent of negligence contributed
to the damage caused severally or separately and further urged that in the wake of
express statutory provisions contained in the Motor Vehicles Act, the concept of Law
of torts and common law stand automatically excluded and have no application at all
in given facts and circumstances of the case.
• Counsel for the claimant-respondents has urged that minority judgement of
aforesaid Full Bench has already been overruled by the Full Bench itself in the
majority opinion, therefore, no reliance can be placed thereon. However, the decision
rendered in Reny Manxmen's case does not lay down the correct law and is opposed
to the view taken by this Court and several other High Courts.
Jurisdiction

The O.P. No. 1, U.P.S.R.T.C. challenged the judgement and given by Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Bulandshahr before this honourable High Court of Allahabad. The
petition invokes its appellate jurisdiction under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) any person aggrieved by an award of a Claims
Tribunal may, within ninety days from the date of the award, prefer an appeal to the High
Court: Provided that no appeal by the person who is required to pay any amount in terms
of such award shall be entertained by the High Court unless he has deposited with it
twenty-five thousand rupees or fifty per cent. of the amount so awarded, whichever is less,
in the manner directed by the High Court: Provided further that the High Court may
entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of ninety days, if it is satisfied that
the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal in time.

Principles Involved

Contributory Negligence

Where a person suffers injury, partly due to the negligence on the part of another person or
persons, and partly as a result of his on negligence, then the negligence on the part of the
injured which contributed to the accident is referred to as Contributory Negligence.

Composite Negligence

Where a person is injured as a result of negligence on the part of two or more wrongdoers,
it is said that the was injured on the account of composite negligence of those wrongdoers.
In this case, each wrongdoer is jointly and severely liable to the injured for payment of the
entire damages and the injured person has the choice of proceeding against all or any of
them.

Joint Tort-Feasor Liability

Joint tort-feasor liability occurs when multiple parties act together to commit a tort, and
each party is collectively responsible for the entire harm caused. In this case, the injured
party can choose to sue any or all of the joint tort-feasors for the full amount of damages.

Several Tort-Feasor Liability

Several tort-feasor liability, on the other hand, arises when each party independently
contributes to the harm. Each party is responsible only for the portion of the harm they
caused. The injured party can choose to sue any or all of the several tort-feasors for their
respective share of the damages.

Joint and Several Tort-Feasor Liability

In this situation, multiple parties may be jointly responsible for a tort, and each party is
also individually responsible for the entire harm caused.
This means that the injured party can choose to sue all the parties together (joint liability)
for the full amount of damages, or they can sue one or more individual parties (several
liability) for the entire harm. If one party cannot fully compensate for the damages, the
other joint tort-feasors may be held individually responsible for the remaining amount.