Proof of accident in motor accident claims must be established - FIRs be registered promptly at appropriate jurisdictional police station

Lack of Credible Evidence and Inconsistent Testimonies Lead to Dismissal of Claim by Rajamma and Others Against Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.

In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the decision of the High Court to dismiss the motor accident claim filed by Rajamma and others against M/s Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. The appellants, who are the family of the deceased, alleged that their breadwinner was killed in a hit-and-run accident. The case hinged on the testimony of an eyewitness and the validity of the First Information Report (FIR) filed regarding the incident.

The claim was initially awarded Rs. 16,02,000 by the Tribunal, based on the testimony of the eyewitness, PW2, who claimed to have seen the accident. However, the High Court reversed the decision, citing contradictions in the eyewitness's testimony and questioning the jurisdiction and delay in the FIR registration.

The Supreme Court, with Justices K. Vinod Chandran and N.V. Anjaria presiding, agreed with the High Court's findings, emphasizing that the proof of accident must be established on the preponderance of probabilities. The Court noted that the testimony of the eyewitness was unreliable due to contradictions and the lack of supporting evidence, such as a license for the claimed fruit shop near the accident scene.

Moreover, the FIR's validity was questioned due to its registration at a police station without jurisdiction and an unexplained delay of 117 days before it was transferred to the appropriate jurisdictional police station. The Court highlighted that for a motor accident claim to be successful, the FIR and witness statements must be consistent and credible to establish the involvement of the offending vehicle and the negligence of the driver.

The Court also noted that in the criminal case, the driver of the vehicle was acquitted, and the eyewitness failed to identify the driver. These factors contributed to the dismissal of the claim, as the Supreme Court found no compelling reason to interfere with the High Court's judgment.

The dismissal of the appeal marks a significant decision in the realm of motor accident claims, reiterating the necessity for credible evidence and the importance of jurisdictional and procedural accuracy in FIR registration.

Bottom Line:

Proof of accident and involvement of offending vehicle must be established on a preponderance of probabilities - Suspicion on FIR registration and contradictions in witness testimony can lead to dismissal of claims.

Statutory provision(s): Motor Vehicles Act, 1988; Evidence Act, 1872

Rajamma v. M/s Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2784588