The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of proving rash and negligent driving based on preponderance of probabilities, emphasizing the significance of FIR as evidence and the inapplicability of strict principles of evidence and standards of proof in MACT claim cases.

JUDGMENT

Sudhir Mittal , J. - A motorcycle accident took place on 08.08.2018 in the area of Gohana-Rohtak Highway. The motorcycle, being driven by Sunil son of Suresh collided with a Tractor-trolley resulting in his death. One Manoj son of Jagdish was also riding the motorcycle. He also lost his life and two separate claim petitions were preferred. The claim petition filed on account of death of Manoj son of Jagdish, has already been decided and no appeal has been filed against the award in the said case. The claim petition on account of death of Sunil son of Suresh has been decided by the instant Award dated 18.02.2020 and total compensation of Rs.17,83,600/- has been awarded payable with interest at the rate of 6 % per annum from the date of the petition till payment.

The present appeal has been preferred by the Insurance company. The only point raised and argued on its behalf is that rash and negligent driving by the driver of the tractor-trolley was not proved by the claimants and, thus, the Tribunal was in error in awarding compensation. In support of his case, learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon Oriental Insurance Company Limited vs. Meena Variyal and others, 2007 (2) RCR (Civil) 698 and Ram Karan vs. Zile Singh, 2001 (3) RCR (Civil) 582.

Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 4 (claimants) has resisted the appeal by arguing that the issue regarding rash and negligent driving is to be proved on the basis of the evidence on record, examined on the touch-stone of preponderance of probabilities. Applying this standard of proof, the Tribunal has correctly held that the driver of the tractor-trolley was guilty of rash and negligent driving and, thus, the Award does not deserve to be interfered with. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon Sunita and others vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and another, 2019 (2) RCR (Civil) 209 and Anita Sharma and others vs. The New India Assurance Company Limited and another, 2021 (1) RCR (Civil) 200 as well as United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Hardeep Kaur and others, 2020 (1) RCR (Civil) 491.

Learned counsel for respondents No.5 and 6 (driver and owner of the vehicle) has supported the claimants.

The learned Tribunal has found the driver of the tractor-trolley guilty of rash and negligent driving by observing as follows:-

“17. In the case in hand, FIR (Ex. P4) was lodged by HC Sonu, who in the FIR stated that while he was on duty to protect Kawarias, Respondent No.1 who was driving the tractor-trolley applied the brakes of the tractor all of a sudden. As a result of this, the motor- cycle of the deceased rammed into the tractor-trolley which resulted in to the death of Manoj and Sunil. Further as per FIR HC Sonu, who was on duty shifted the deceased to the hospital, where they died. It is the duty of every police official to report about the commission of offence. I am of the considered view that there is no force in the contention of counsel for insurance company that since no eye-witness has been examined, the case should be dismissed. In the case in hand, the FIR was lodged by HC Sonu. The statement of a police official, who was acting in discharge of his official duty is a good piece of evidence. There is no doubt in my mind that the accident took place in the manner reported by HC Sonu in the FIR. Moreover, the deceased were shifted to PGIMS, Rohtak by HC Sonu. Considering the totality of the circumstances, I am of the considered view that the deceased died on account of the injuries suffered by them in the accident. Accordingly, I find this issue in favour of the Claimants.”

From the above paragraph, it is evident that Head Constable Sonu was on duty to protect Kawarias in the area of Gohana-Rohtak Highway. He saw the tractor-trolley being followed by the motorcycle on which the deceased persons were riding. The driver of the tractor-trolley suddenly applied brakes resulting in the accident leading to death of the riders. He then shifted the de