Failure to prove negligence with material evidence defeats a claim for enhanced motor-accident compensation.

The appellant, a pillion rider, claimed that she was injured when the motorcycle driven by her husband lost control on 2 June 2015.

She sought compensation, alleging permanent disability and loss of earning capacity.

The Tribunal awarded ₹38,630 for pain and suffering, medical expenses, and loss of income during treatment, but held the husband liable and did not impose liability on the insurer.

The appellant appealed, seeking enhanced compensation and liability against the insurer.

The High Court noted that the appellant had produced medical records but no FIR, charge-sheet, or other material establishing how the accident occurred; her complaint had been sent by post, and there was no evidence of police action.

Section 166(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 permits a compensation claim to be filed, at the claimant’s option, before the Claims Tribunal having jurisdiction over the place of the accident, the claimant’s residence or place of business, or the defendant’s residence.

An appeal against a Claims Tribunal award lies under Section 173(1) of the Act.

The judgment applied the principle that a claimant must provide material evidence establishing the alleged negligent conduct and its connection to the injury; it cited no precedent on that principle.

The Court accepted that the Belagavi Tribunal had jurisdiction because the appellant ordinarily resided there, notwithstanding that the accident occurred in Maharashtra.

However, the appellant had not produced an FIR, charge-sheet, or other material corroborating her account of the accident, and there was no evidence that police had acted on her complaint. The Court therefore found no sufficient basis to establish that the husband’s negligent riding caused the injuries.

It also found no basis to enhance compensation for future income loss, relying on the absence of supporting material beyond the doctor’s disability certificate, which was unaccompanied by treatment records.

The Tribunal’s award of ₹38,630, with interest at 6% per annum and liability fixed on the husband, was left undisturbed.