In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court clarified that attempting to overtake a vehicle does not inherently constitute rashness or negligence unless evidence suggests otherwise.

A bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice CT Ravikumar emphasized that the appellant, Prem Lal Anand, was engaged in a common road maneuver—overtaking—when he suffered severe injuries in an accident caused by a speeding tractor.

Apex Court enunciated that,“merely because a person was attempting to overtake a vehicle, cannot be said to be an act of rashness or negligence with nothing to the contrary suggested from the record. Further, it is the claimant-appellant(s) who lost a member of their family. Not only was the claimant-appellant, Prem Lal Anand, doing an act which is an everyday occurrence on the road that is overtaking a vehicle but he resultantly suffered extensive injuries himself. Apart from that, it has also been proved that the offending vehicle was driven rashly and negligently. These two factors, taken together, lead us to the conclusion that the finding of contributory negligence against appellant No.1 was erroneous and unjustified. Consequently, compensation awarded on this count has to be revised.”

The incident, which also resulted in the tragic death of his wife, led to a legal battle over compensation. Initially, the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal awarded ₹1,01,250 with 12% interest per annum, a decision upheld by the high court. However, the Supreme Court found the earlier ruling of contributory negligence to be erroneous, noting that the crash was primarily caused by the negligent behavior of the second tractor driver.

Consequently, the court revised the compensation to ₹11,25,000 with an 8% interest rate, applying a higher multiplier of 15 instead of 9