NELSON SAILO
Parmawii – Appellant
Versus
C. Lalthangmuana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NELSON SAILO, J.
1. Heard Mr. Johny L. Tochhawng, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. L.H. Lianhrima, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Ruth Lalruatfeli, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This is an appeal preferred by the appellants against the Judgment & Award dated 02.12.2021 rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Tribunal), Aizawl in MACT Case No. 6/2018 dismissing the claim of the appellants filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (M.V Act).
3. Brief facts of the case essential for disposal of the instant appeal is that the appellant No. 1 is the mother of the deceased and the appellant Nos. 2, 3 & 4 are the children of the deceased person. The deceased person late Lalnunhlima, who was aged about 26 years is said to have died due to a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 17.02.2013. Late Lalnunhlima on 17.02.2013 was heating up bitumen by burning firewood. At that moment, a truck bearing registration number MZ07 - 0349 driven by the respondent No. 2 and owned by the respondent No. 1 in the instant appeal ran over the firewood, which was used to heat up the bitumen. As a result, the bitumen got spilled upon late Lalnun
Anita Sharma & Ors. Vs. New India Assurance Company Limited & Anr. (2021) 1 SCC 171
Kishan Gopal & Anr. Vs. Lala & Ors. (2014) 1 SCC 244
Mathew Alexander Vs. Mohammed Shafi & Anr. 2023 INSC 621
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Meena Variyal & Ors. (2007) 5 SCC 428
Parmeshwari Vs. Amir Chand & Ors. (2011) 11 SCC 635
Sunita & Ors. Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation & Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 486
Surender Kumar Arora & Anr. Vs. Manoj Bisla & Ors. (2012) 4 SCC 552
Vimla Devi & Ors. Vs. National Insurance Company Limited & Anr. (2019) 2 SCC 186
In claims under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the burden of proof lies on the claimant to establish negligence, which must be supported by cogent evidence.
The court established that the principle of ‘res ipsa loquitur’ can shift the burden of proof in negligence cases, particularly when a charge-sheet is filed against the driver, indicating prima facie....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principle of res ipsa loquitur in cases where it may not be possible for the claimant to discharge the burden of proving neg....
The main legal point established is the requirement to prove rashness and negligence in claims under Section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and the applicability of res ipsa loquitur in determining n....
Negligence in motor vehicle accidents can be established by circumstantial evidence; strict standards of proof are relaxed under the MV Act, emphasizing broader interpretations of causality in liabil....
In civil proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act, the standard of proof is based on the preponderance of probability, and claimants are not required to prove the accident beyond reasonable doubt. Th....
Proof of negligence is essential for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act; failure to establish liability leads to denial of claims.
Point of Law : Not only his evidence regarding rash and negligent driving of driver of offending vehicle (Truck) was unshaken but also it was reaffirmed during cross-examination that there was no fau....
In motor vehicle accident claims, the absence of eyewitnesses does not preclude establishing negligence; the standard of proof is based on preponderance of probabilities.
Accident claim – Proof - Negligence on the part of the driver or rider, and person alleged to have sustained injuries in a motor accident died in consequence of the accidental injuries to be proved.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.