Smt. Geeta Dei And Another vs Bheem Singh
2025 Latest Caselaw 5345 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Smt. Geeta Dei And Another vs Bheem Singh on 7 November, 2025

               Office Notes,
            reports, orders or
             proceedings or
No   Date                                    COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
              directions and
            Registrar's order
             with Signatures

                                 AO No. 445 of 2022
                                 Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, learned counsel for the appellant.

2. Mr. Ravi Babulkar, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2.

3. Mr. Pulak Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent no. 5.

4. This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 15.09.2022 passed by learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/Uttarkashi, District Uttarkashi in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 39 of 2018, Smt. Geeta Dei and Another Vs. Bheem Singh and Others.

5. The main contention of learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company is that the learned Tribunal failed to appreciate that the accident was a result of contributory negligence of both drivers involved, and therefore, the quantum of compensation ought to have been suitably reduced. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the award deserves to be set aside or suitably modified. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that at the time of accident, the pillion driver was holding an umbrella, which was covering the face of the driver of the scooty, and, as such, the accident occurred due to the contributory negligence of both the drivers, therefore, the Insurance Company is liable to pay only 50% of the compensation amount to the claimants.

6. Learned counsel for the claimants has argued that the point raised by learned counsel for the appellant regarding contributory negligence of both the drivers is not substantiated by any evidence.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company has submitted that the driver was examined and in his examination, he has submitted that at the time of accident, the pillion driver was holding an umbrella, which was covering the face of the driver of the scooty. As such, there is negligence on the part of both the drivers involved.

8. On this point, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2-claimants and respondent no. 5 have submitted that this point was not proved by any independent witnesses and also there was no CCTV footage of the same.

9. Thus, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and award dated 15.09.2022 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal.

10. Accordingly, the present Appeal from Order is liable to be dismissed and the same is hereby dismissed.

11. Further, the statutory amount of Rs. 25,000/- deposited in the Registry of this Court shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal for payment to the appellant/Insurance Company.

(Alok Mahra J.) 07.11.2025 Ujjwal