Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Defects have been removed.
(2.) By way of this appeal at the behest of the New India Assurance Company (hereinafter referred to as "Insurance Company"), several grounds are raised. (i) That the accident occurred due to head on collision and therefore holding the driver of the vehicle insured by Insurance Company as solely negligent is bad in law. (ii) That the claimant who was riding as a pillion rider along with two other persons was not wearing helmet and therefore he has violated the provisions of Section 128 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1988') and therefore he is negligent to that effect. (iii) That the prescriptions were not proved and the Tribunal illegally and arbitrarily awarded Rs.50,000/- under the head of medical expenses.
(3.) This Court has perused the judgment of the Tribunal. It would be relevant to discuss the principles for deciding contributory negligence and for that the principles for considering negligence will also have to be looked into.;