Supreme Court finds driver who suddenly braked on highway primarily liable for accident

The Supreme Court has held that a driver who brakes suddenly on a highway without giving any warning to vehicles behind can be held primarily responsible for a resulting collision, even if the vehicle at the rear hits first. [S Mohammed Hakkim v. National Insurance Co Ltd & Ors].The ruling came in a case involving a young engineering student whose leg had to be amputated after a three-vehicle accident in 2017..A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar ruled that on highways with fast-moving vehicles, drivers have a heightened duty to signal or warn before stopping. Failing to do so, the Court said, will attract negligence.“On a highway, high speed of vehicles is expected and if a driver intends to stop his vehicle, he has a responsibility to give a warning or signal to other vehicles moving behind…There is nothing on record to suggest that the car driver had taken any such precaution.”.The incident occurred on January 7, 2017. The appellant, Mohammed Hakkim, was riding pillion on a motorcycle in Tamil Nadu when the car ahead of them braked suddenly. The motorcycle hit the rear of the car, and both riders fell. A bus coming from behind drove over the appellant, which ultimately led to the amputation of the appellant’s left leg.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of ₹91.62 lakh, later reduced to ₹73.29 lakh, after holding the appellant partly negligent. .The Supreme Court disagreed with that assessment. While acknowledging that the appellant had contributed to the accident by not maintaining sufficient distance, it held that the car driver’s sudden braking, without any warning, was the root cause of the incident. The bus driver’s conduct, in failing to stop in time, was also found to be negligent..The Court noted that the car driver’s explanation for suddenly braking that his wife, who was pregnant, had a vomiting sensation, was not a sufficient or reasonable justification..Applying Rule 231 of the Road Regulation Rules, 1989, the Court observed that while the rear vehicle must maintain a safe distance, the vehicle in front cannot stop abruptly without warning. “If the bus had not been involved in the accident, the appellant would have suffered normal injuries,” the Court added. It concluded that the car driver was liable for 50 per cent of the negligence, the bus driver for 30 per cent, and the appellant for 20 per cent..In recalculating the compensation, the Court set the notional monthly income of the appellant at ₹20,000. He was in the third year of an engineering course in Coimbatore at the time of the accident. Referring to an earlier decision, the Court observed that “students recruited through campus interviews are at least offered a sum of ₹20,000 per month.”With a 40 per cent increase for future prospects and applying a multiplier of 18 in line with previous judgments, the Court fixed the total loss of income at ₹60.48 lakh. It also restored the ₹18 lakh awarded by the MACT for attendant charges, rejecting the High Court’s view that this was excessive.“The appellant has lost his entire left leg, amputated from the waist downwards, which means that he would require assistance throughout his life to perform the basic daily routine,” the Court said. The compensation under the head of “loss of marital prospects” was also increased from ₹2.5 lakh to ₹5 lakh.The final compensation was calculated at ₹1.14 crore. After deducting 20 per cent towards contributory negligence, the net payable amount comes to ₹91.39 lakh, with interest at 7.5 percent per annum from the date of the claim.The Court directed the insurance companies of the car and bus to pay their respective shares within four weeks..Senior Advocate Haripriya Padmanabhan, along with Advocates Gokulakrisnan, Nawaz Sherif, Vishal Sinha, Manoj Kumar A and Advocate-on-Record Raghunatha Sethupathy appeared for the appellant.For the respondents, Advocate-on-Record Amit Kumar Singh appeared along with Advocates K Enatoli Sema, Chubalemla Chang, Prang Newmai, Shantha Devi Raman and Garvesh Kabra..[Read Judgment]