Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court heard an appeal concerning liability between two insurance companies for a 2013 accident involving a trailer and truck collision -- The Tribunal initially found the truck driver negligent and held Respondent liable -- The High Court reversed this finding and held Appellant liable -- The Supreme Court examined the evidence, particularly the claimant Cleaner's testimony about inadequate distance between vehicles -- The Court applied Regulation 23 of the Rules of the Road Regulations, 1989 and precedent cases including Nishan Singh v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd -- The Court found the truck driver negligent for failing to maintain safe distance -- The Court restored the Tribunal's award holding Tata AIG liable and dismissed arguments about contributory negligence
Headnote
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by Appellant -- The Court restored the Tribunal's award which had mulcted liability on Respondents -- The Court held that the driver of the truck following the trailer failed to maintain sufficient distance as mandated by Regulation 23 of the Rules of the Road Regulations, 1989 -- The evidence of the claimant Cleaner established that the truck maintained only 20 feet distance when 40-50 feet was required -- The Court found no merit in the contention of contributory negligence -- The High Court's order reversing the Tribunal was set aside
Premium Content
The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access key legal points
Issue of Consideration: Which insurance company has the liability to satisfy the award in favour of the claimant injured in the collision of two vehicles
Premium Content
The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access critical case issues
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal -- The Court reversed the High Court's order and restored the Tribunal's award -- The Court held Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited liable to satisfy the compensation award -- The Court dismissed arguments about contributory negligence
