Kolkata, June 13 (IANS) The Calcutta High Court has held that the mere fact that a vehicle was stationary at the time of an accident does not absolve its owner or insurer of liability if the vehicle was negligently parked in an unauthorised location, while enhancing compensation awarded to the family of a deceased homemaker killed in a road crash on a national highway in West Bengal.
A single-judge Bench of Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury passed the ruling while deciding a batch of appeals and cross-objections arising out of a fatal accident that took place on April 16, 2022, near Harina Bus Stand on NH-6 under Kharagpur Local Police Station in Paschim Medinipur district.
The accident claimed the lives of Shamit Samanta, his wife Barnali Samanta Nandi, and their elder daughter Sinjini, while their younger daughter Saanvi sustained serious injuries.
According to the claimants, the family was travelling from Kolkata to Midnapore when a speeding lorry overtook their car from the extreme left side of the road, raising a cloud of dust and severely reducing visibility.
Their vehicle then collided with a mini-truck parked in the middle of the highway without any signal or warning. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company challenged the compensation awards passed by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, contending that the offending mini-truck was stationary at the time of the accident and therefore its driver could not be held negligent.
Rejecting the contention, the Calcutta High Court said that a stationary vehicle could still attract liability if it was parked improperly and created a hazard for other road users.
“It is to be remembered that the mere plea that a vehicle was stationary does not absolve the owner of the vehicle from liability if the said vehicle was parked in an improper place causing such an accident,” Justice Chowdhury observed.
The judge noted that the tribunal had relied on evidence and the police charge sheet, which stated that the accident occurred because the mini-truck bearing registration number WB-33-5717 had been illegally parked on the road.
“Thus, there is no error in the findings of the Learned Trial Judge about the accident caused by the negligent parking of the driver of the vehicle bearing no. WB-33-5717 (Mini-Truck) in the middle of the road,” the judgment said.
In a separate appeal concerning the death of Shamit Samanta, the insurer had also argued that the deceased himself contributed to the accident by driving negligently.
However, the Calcutta High Court found no evidence to support the allegation and observed that the insurance company had failed to produce any material showing contributory negligence on the part of the deceased driver. It further held that the testimony of eyewitnesses could not be discarded merely because they were not summoned as witnesses.
“The fact that the eye witnesses in motor accident claim cases are not summoned as witnesses does not destroy the credibility of the said witnesses if their evidence creates confidence in the minds of the Court,” it said.
While upholding the tribunal’s award of Rs 2.10 crore compensation in the case relating to Shamit Samanta’s death, the Calcutta High Court declined to grant any further enhancement sought by the claimants.
It observed that the tribunal had correctly assessed the deceased’s income and awarded just compensation in line with principles laid down by the Supreme Court.
In the connected case concerning the death of homemaker Barnali Samanta Nandi, the Calcutta High Court enhanced the compensation from Rs 9.17 lakh to Rs 11 lakh, along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition.
While assessing compensation for the death of a housewife, Justice Chowdhury stressed the invaluable contribution made by women within households.
“The loss suffered by members of a family on the death of a housewife cannot be compensated by money. Thus, the compensation which appears to the Court as just and reasonable should be awarded,” the judgment said.
Referring to Supreme Court precedents, the Calcutta High Court reiterated that the services rendered by a wife and mother cannot be measured solely in monetary terms and include care, guidance and support provided to the family round the clock. Considering the status of the family and the responsibilities shouldered by the deceased, the judgment held that compensation of Rs 11 lakh would be “just and reasonable”.
The Calcutta High Court directed Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company to deposit the enhanced compensation amount along with interest within eight weeks.
–IANS
pds/dan
