*IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. VERSUS PEARL BEVERAGES LTD. JUDGMENT*
*Forum- Supreme Court of India*
*Date -12th April, 2021*
*Sub-Whether Insurance company is liable to pay compensation for loss of car which was being driven under the influence of alchohol- Section 185 of Motor Vehicles Act , Section 106 of Evidence Act analysed threadbare*- *All you want to know about intoxication and the manner in which alchohol effects your body and brain.*

*This is one of those cases which is ripe for a film being made on the facts* where the Apex Court was dealing with a case where a 27 year young boy with his friend was driving Porsche late night at 2.25am in Delhi at an alarming speed under the influence of alchohol and a massive accident was done leading to total damage of the car, though no causality happened. The question arose whether the driver of the car was or was not under the influence of alchohol which had to be *30mg per 100 Ml * of blood as per the lab report as per Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act. However, neither the medical test was not performed under suspicious circumstances and in those circumstances, the court upheld the principle of * Res ipsa loquitur*
the principle that the *mere occurrence of some types of accident is sufficient to imply negligence* as well as Section 106 of Evidence Act by saying that here the burden was on the respondent driver to proove that he was not under the influence of alchohol beyond what was the prescribed as per the law. Based on catena of English, USA and other cases, in this classic case the Court examined the meaning of intoxication, the detailed examination of what was the effect of alchohol could have on the human body, allowed the appeal of Insurer by holding the insurer not liable under the MV Act.

A classic case worth reading

Ramesh Patodia
12-04-2021