MACT may establish negligence via preponderance of probabilities using police records and *res ipsa loquitur*.

On October 7, 2012, Sanjar Alam, a 22-year-old rickshaw puller, died after being hit by a truck (offending vehicle) near Pratap Nagar Metro Pillar, Delhi

The deceased was survived by his widow and two minor sisters

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded Rs. 18,01,864/- with 9% interest, holding the truck driver solely negligent based on the FIR and Mechanical Inspection Report

The Appellant/Insurance Company challenged the award on the grounds that no eyewitnesses or Investigation Officers were examined, and the Tribunal erred in calculating income, dependency, and future prospects

MACT proceedings are inquiries, not adversarial trials, and are governed by the standard of "preponderance of probabilities" rather than "beyond reasonable doubt," as held in Bimla Devi v. HRTC and Anita Sharma v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

It applied the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur ("the thing speaks for itself"), allowing an inference of negligence from the nature of the accident

The Court relied on National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pushpa Rana to affirm that an FIR and charge-sheet constitute sufficient prima facie evidence of negligence

For quantum, it applied National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi regarding future prospects and funeral/estate expenses, and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram regarding consortium

The Court rejected the Appellant’s argument regarding the lack of eyewitnesses, noting that the Mechanical Inspection Report showed fresh damage to the truck’s front, and evidence suggested the driver was under the influence of alcohol

The Court reasoned that a truck hitting a slow-moving rickshaw inherently suggests negligence by the heavier vehicle, invoking res ipsa loquitur

It clarified that the Tribunal must "join the dots" using three pillars: the inquiry-based nature of proceedings, res ipsa loquitur, and the preponderance of probabilities

On quantum, the Court reduced future prospects from 50% to 40% as the deceased was not a permanent employee

However, it upheld the 1/3rd deduction for personal expenses, ruling that the minor sisters were dependents in the absence of rebuttal evidence

The Court deleted the award for "loss of love and affection," adjusted "funeral expenses" and "loss of estate" to Rs. 15,000/- each, and granted Rs. 40,000/- each to the widow and two sisters as consortium

The Registry was directed to release the recomputed amount to the claimants and refund any excess deposit to the Insurance Company