The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently comprising of a bench of Justice Vinod Chaterjee Koul ruled that the strict principles of proof in a criminal case will not be applicable in a claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act and that standard to be followed in motor accident claims is one of preponderance of probability rather than one of proof beyond reasonable doubt.(Showkat Ahmad Bhat & others Vs Khazir Mohammad Bhat & others)
Facts of the case
The appeal was filed against an award passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pulwama in a Claim Petition whereby the Tribunal had directed the appellants to pay an amount of Rs.4,91,000/- along with 6% interest per annum from the date of institution of claim till realization to the claimants/respondents, on the grounds made mention of therein.
A claim petition, as perusal of the file would bring to the surface, was filed by claimants/respondents 1&2, before the Tribunal, averring therein that deceased, Mudasir Ahmad Bhat died in an accident, due to rash and negligent driving of driver of offending vehicle which was insured with respondent- Insurance Company. Claimants/Respondents 1&2 prayed for grant of compensation of Rs.13,30000/-, along with interest.
Contention of the Parties
Learned counsel for appellant Insurance Company, stated that appellant had been set ex parte by the Tribunal, followed by issuance of impugned ex parte Award against appellants and non-contesting respondents and even no summon or notice was served upon appellants. He also stated that award impugned is illegal as it is against the facts.
He further contended that appellant no.1 was not driving the tractor as he was not driver of tractor and that the story alleged by respondents/claimants in their claim petition is totally false. It was also contended by learned counsel that there is no proof produced before the Tribunal by claimant concerning rash, negligent and careless driving of offending tractor by appellant no.1 and that no positive and admissible proof or evidence is on the file and that even no issue with regard to the fact that deceased was travelling in offending tractor was raised or settled. Learned counsel also averred that the findings recorded during investigation has not been brought on the record nor has been proved before the Tribunal.
Court's observations and Judgment
The bench taking note of the contention of the party remarked, "Above contentions of learned counsel for appellants are misconceived. Perusal of the record reveals that although appellants were duly served yet they opted not to cause appearance to contest the claim petition before the Tribunal and, resultantly, the Tribunal rightly initiated ex parte proceedings against appellant."
The bench observed, "It is to be kept in mind that in a situation of present nature, the Tribunal has rightly taken a holistic view of the matter and it was to be borne in mind that strict proof of an accident caused by a particular vehicle in a particular manner may not be possible to be done by claimants. The claimants were merely to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probability, and the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt could not have been applied in the matter relating to payment of compensation in a motor vehicle accident."
The bench taking note of the cases remarked, "It is a trite law that strict principles of proof in a criminal case will not be applicable in a claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act and that standard to be followed in motor accident claims is one of preponderance of probability rather than one of proof beyond reasonable doubt. Reference in this regard is made to Sunita v. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, (2019) SCC Online SC 195; Bimla Devi v. Himachal RTC (2009) 13 SCC 530; Dulcina Fernandes v. Joaquim Xavier Cruz, (2013) 10 SCC 646."
The bench dismissing the appeal remarked, "The bench The Supreme Court in Anita Sharma and others v. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and others (2021) 1 SCC 171, has held that in claim cases, evidence is to be tested on preponderance of probability and principles of strict rule of evidence, proving a point beyond reasonable doubt, is not available in claim cases, which are adjudged under a benevolent provision contained in Motor Vehicles Act."
Picture Source :
