# Delhi High Court Rules Footpath Barber Not Responsible For Accident, Blames Truck Driver > The Delhi High Court has ruled that a roadside barber operating on a footpath cannot be held contributorily negligent in an accident caused by a speeding truck. The court set aside a tribunal order and increased the compensation awarded to the victim. **Type:** article · **Category:** Delhi · **Published:** 2026-08-31 · **Source:** TrendKia **Canonical:** https://trendkia.com/en/delhi/delhi-high-court-rules-footpath-barber-not-responsible-for-accident-blames-truck-driver-25330 · **Language:** English **Tags:** Delhi High Court, Road Accident, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Justice Anish Dayal, Truck Crash, Footpath Rules, Legal Verdict The Delhi High Court has firmly declined to hold a roadside barber operating on a footpath negligent in a road accident case. Delivering its verdict, the court emphasized that footpaths are safe and sacred spaces meant exclusively for pedestrians and are never intended for vehicular movement. Consequently, a barber who was struck down by a speeding and recklessly driven truck while working by the roadside cannot be held responsible for any share of negligence. ## High Court Increases Compensation Amount The ruling was pronounced by Justice Anish Dayal on August 19, ordering an increase in the compensation amount payable to the barber who operated his makeshift shop on a footpath in the Anand Parbat industrial area of Delhi. The High Court overturned a 2022 ruling by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, which had previously reduced the compensation by 30 percent on the grounds of contributory negligence. Additionally, the court directed the insurance company to pay the appellant barber Rs 1.71 lakh along with an annual interest rate of 6 percent. ## Background of the Incident The incident dates back to September 2019, when the appellant was carrying out his work by placing a chair on the footpath and suffered severe injuries after being hit by a speeding truck. During the proceedings, Justice Anish Dayal noted that while placing a chair on the footpath for commercial work might render the appellant unauthorized under civic norms, it remains strictly a matter of municipal enforcement or civic responsibility rather than contributory negligence in a traffic crash. ## Observations by the Court The bench highlighted that motor vehicle drivers must show absolute respect for pedestrian zones, and a person cannot be accused of contributory negligence simply because of their presence on a footpath or pedestrian walkway. > The court stated that contributory negligence can only be established if the injured or deceased directly contributed to the occurrence of the crash, whereas in this specific case, the accident took place primarily because the vehicle was driven onto or collided with the footpath. Reiterating its stance, the single bench pointed out that pedestrian walkways are designated sanctuaries that should never experience vehicular intrusion. The accountability for such incidents rests entirely with the driver operating the vehicle in a prohibited and dangerous manner. ## Broader Context and Social Media References Footpath safety and violations have frequently sparked public discussions, such as a widely circulated video where an elderly woman in Kozhikode stood like a rock in front of a scooty rider misusing the footpath, successfully halting the violation. Public awareness surrounding urban pathways also garners international attention, exemplified when an American vlogger expressed surprise at street cleanliness in India and issued a strong rebuttal to online trolls regarding urban conditions. ## What this means for you This judicial ruling has significant practical implications for ordinary citizens, pedestrians, and small vendors operating along urban roadways. - **Across India:** Street vendors and pedestrians receive stronger legal protection establishing that a motorist driving onto a pedestrian walkway bears full responsibility for resultant crashes. This prevents tribunals and insurance companies from arbitrarily reducing compensation based on victim positioning. - **In Delhi:** Workers and small business operators running roadside or pavement stalls in industrial areas like Anand Parbat are assured that while municipal infractions are handled separately, they maintain full entitlement to unreduced compensation when struck by reckless vehicles. ## Questions & Answers ### 1. What is the main ruling delivered by the Delhi High Court in this accident case? The Delhi High Court ruled that a footpath barber cannot be held contributorily negligent and placed complete responsibility on the truck driver. ### 2. When and where did the accident take place? The accident occurred in September 2019 in the Anand Parbat industrial area of Delhi, where the victim operated his shop on a footpath. ### 3. How did the High Court modify the compensation amount? The court set aside the 2022 tribunal ruling and ordered the insurance company to pay the appellant Rs 1.71 lakh along with 6% annual interest. ### 4. What did the court state regarding contributory negligence? The court clarified that being on a footpath might involve municipal regulations, but it does not mean the victim contributed to the occurrence of the crash. ### 5. Which judge pronounced this verdict? The verdict was delivered by Justice Anish Dayal on August 19. --- _TrendKia — Har trend, sabse pehle.. Machine-readable view; canonical HTML at the URL above._