Liability for compensation remains with the owner when the offending vehicle is uninsured and negligence is established.

On April 23, 2018, Rakeshdas Mahant died after his motorcycle was struck by a tractor (bearing registration No. CG13-BJ-7405) driven by Ritesh Kumar Rathia.

The claimants (parents and siblings) filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, asserting the driver’s negligence.

The Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gharghoda, awarded Rs. 9,37,200/- with 9% interest, holding the owner liable as the vehicle was uninsured.

The owner (Appellant) appealed, contending that the deceased was negligent and the motorcycle had simply slipped.

Whether the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the tractor driver or due to the negligence of the deceased.

Whether the Tribunal’s award fastening liability on the owner of the uninsured vehicle was legally sustainable.

The court applied Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, regarding appeals against awards, and Section 166 concerning claims for compensation arising out of accidents involving death or bodily injury.

It adhered to the principle of "preponderance of probabilities" in motor accident claims, where the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) and filing of a final report (charge sheet) against a driver serve as prima facie evidence of negligence in the absence of rebuttal evidence.

The Court rejected the Appellant’s plea of contributory negligence by the deceased.

It noted that the FIR (Ex. A-2) and the police final report specifically attributed the accident to the rash and negligent driving of the tractor driver.

Although the driver (NAW-01) testified that the deceased was at fault, he admitted during cross-examination that an FIR was registered and a final report was submitted against him.

The Court observed that neither the owner nor the driver had filed any formal complaints with superior police authorities regarding a "false" FIR or the seizure of the vehicle.

Eyewitness testimony from Shivratan Mahant (AW-02) remained firm during cross-examination regarding the driver's negligence.

As the vehicle was uninsured, the court determined that the Tribunal correctly applied the law in holding the owner personally liable.

The Court held that there were no sufficient grounds to interfere with the finding of negligence or the quantum of compensation.

The owner of the offending vehicle remains liable to pay Rs. 9,37,200/- with 9% interest per annum to the claimants.