Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the accident was the outcome of the head-on collision but the learned tribunal has failed to determine the negligence of the deceased car driver,whereas if the accident was the outcome of head-on collision, some negligence is to be attributed to drivers of both the vehicles. In this regard, he relies on Bijoy Kumar Dugar versus Bidya Dhar Dutta and others; (2006) 3 SCC 242, Sri Krishna Vishweshwar Hedge versus General Manager,KSRTC; (2008) 15 SCC 771 and Renuka Devi versus Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corp.;(2008) 17 SCC 56 . He further submits that the dependants of the deceased were mother, wife and two minor children. Therefore the two minor children should have been taken into one unit in view of Rule 220-A (2) (iii) of the U.P. Motor Vehicle Rules 1998 and the deduction should have been 1/3rd, whereas the tribunal has deducted only 1/4th on the basis of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited versus Pranay Sethi and others;(2017)16SCC 680/AIR 2017 SC 5157 , whereas when there is a statutory provision, the same could not have been applied in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co.Ltd. versus K.V.Urmila Shukla;2021 SCC Online 822.
