Back
NIDHI GUPTA
Lilam Kumari Devi – Appellant
Versus
Rohtash – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim filed under motor vehicles act for accident. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. appellants argue negligence of the driver. (Para 3) |
| 3. lack of evidence to support claimants' case. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. negligence in motor accident claims not proven by fir. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. appeal dismissed; merits not found. (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT
Nidhi Gupta, J.
Present appeal has been filed by the claimants against Award dated 4.10.2019 passed by Ld. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat (hereinafter referred to as 'the Ld. Tribunal') whereby the claim petition bearing MACT Case NO.56/2018 filed by the Appellants under section 166 and 140 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT ,1988, has been dismissed.
2. Appellants/claimants before the Tribunal were the widow, minor son and father of deceased-Raj Kishore Yadav who died in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 9.1.2018 allegedly involving bus bearing registration No. HR-55-P-1039 (hereinafter referred to as 'the vehicle in question') which was allegedly being driven by Respondent no.1-Rohtash.
3. It is inter alia submitted by the learned counsel for the Appellants that the Ld. Tribunal was in error in dismissing the claim petition as it stands established on
The relaxed onus of proof on the claimant in motor accident cases, as per the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The standard of proof in accident claims is preponderance of probabilities, but concrete evidence of involvement and negligence is necessary for a successful claim.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
