Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.39 seconds)
Documents citing Sri Saravana vs Sri T Kiran Vinod Kumar on 18 March, 2013

Smt Lakkamma vs B Nagaraju on 2 December, 2022

6. Having heard the respective counsel for the parties and also on perusal of the material on record and also considering the contributory negligence, in the cross- examination of PW1, she categorically admitted that she crossed the road where there was no zebra crossing and when such material is available on record before the Tribunal, when the claimant crossed the road when there is no provision to cross the road, the very contention of the counsel for the claimant that contributory negligence taken is on the higher side cannot be accepted. However, the counsel for the claimant relied upon the judgment reported in 2013 (3) KLJ 643 in the case of SARAVANA vs T KIRAN VINOD KUMAR AND ANOTHER wherein this Court held that the contributory negligence on the part of the victim/pedestrian is only 15% and taking of 30% is reduced. However, this Court has to take note of the material on record. Here is a case of no provision to cross the road and also no zebra crossing and after crossing the road divider made an attempt to cross the road and also she has noticed the vehicle coming at the distance of one furlong and also admits that by calculating in her mind, she tried to cross the road before 7 reaching the motorcycle and hence, the reasoning given by the Tribunal is not erroneous and rightly taken the contributory negligence of 20% and hence, no grounds are made out to reduce the same.
Karnataka High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - H P Sandesh - Full Document

Vinod Rao Alias Vinoba Rao vs Chimana Ram .D on 19 January, 2016

He has also relied upon decision reported in (Saravana Vs. T.Kiran Vinod Kumar and another) 2014(4) AKR 243 in which it is held that, " Claimant had crossed road where he was not supposed to cross road, rider of offending vehicle having approached junction had not reduced speed of vehicle due to which accident occurred, claimant held guilty of contributory negligence to extent of 15% and rider of offending vehicle to extent of 85%".
Bangalore District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1