Contributory Negligence in Motor Accident Claims: Supreme Court Restores Tribunal Finding Where Eyewitness and Vehicle Damage Clearly Establish Sole Negligence
Case Name: Radha Thevannoor v. M/s National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.
Citation: 2025 INSC 1424
Date of Judgment/Order: 08 December 2025
Bench: Ahsanuddin Amanullah, K. Vinod Chandran
Held: The Supreme Court held that contributory negligence cannot be attributed to the deceased driver when reliable eyewitness testimony and vehicle inspection reports conclusively establish rash and negligent driving by the offending vehicle alone.
Summary: The appellant’s husband died in a road accident occurring at night on a four-lane National Highway. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal found the truck driver solely negligent based on eyewitness testimony. The High Court, however, reversed this finding and attributed 50% contributory negligence to the deceased, thereby reducing the compensation.
Before the Supreme Court, the appellant confined the challenge to the finding of contributory negligence. The Court examined the evidence on record, including the testimony of an independent eyewitness who clearly deposed that the truck was being driven rashly on the right lane and abruptly swerved into the left lane, colliding with the car. The vehicle inspection report corroborated this version by showing extensive damage on the left side of the truck, consistent with the eyewitness account.
The Court noted that the High Court discarded the eyewitness testimony on speculative reasoning, despite the witness consistently stating that he had observed the manner of driving prior to the collision. The defence version of tyre burst was also rejected, as it was unsupported by the inspection report and contradicted by the conduct of the truck driver, who did not contest negligence before the Tribunal.
The Supreme Court reiterated that contributory negligence must be founded on clear evidence and not on assumptions or conjectures, particularly when the record overwhelmingly points to sole negligence of the offending vehicle.
Decision: The appeal was partly allowed. The finding of contributory negligence recorded by the High Court was set aside, and the Tribunal’s award holding the truck driver solely negligent was restored. The deletion of compensation under the head of love and affection was upheld. The claimants were held entitled to the balance compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum as directed by the Tribunal.