Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
NIDHI GUPTA
Jog Dhian – Appellant
Versus
Surender Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NIDHI GUPTA, J.
The present appeal has been filed by the claimants against the dismissal of their claim petition by the learned MACT, Kurukshetra (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’), vide Award dated 12.02.2019 passed in MACP Case No. 259 dated22.07.2015 filed under Sections 166/140 and 141 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The 2 claimants are the parents of the deceased Sumit, who was 24 years old at the time of accident.
2. It was the pleaded case of the appellants before the learned Tribunal that deceased Sumit had died due to the injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 27.05.2015 due to the rash and negligent driving of a Car bearing registration No.HR-07V-3303 (hereinafter referred to as “the offending vehicle”) being driven and owned by respondent No.1; and insured by respondent No.2. However, learned learned Tribunal on the basis of pleadings and evidence adduced before it concluded that appellants had failed to prove the accident in question and had dismissed the claim petition of the appellants on the ground that “Petitioners have failed to prove the fact that accident in question has b
In motor accident cases, the standard of proof required is preponderance of probabilities, and the court must take a holistic view of evidence to infer culpability from reasonable circumstances.
The standard of proof in civil liability cases is preponderance of probability, not beyond reasonable doubt, impacting negligence assessments in motor accident claims.
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
