Sajeena Ikhbal & Ors. vs. Mini Babu George & Ors.
Background
The widow, minor child, and parents of a man named Ikhbal, who died in a 2013 road accident in Kerala after his motorcycle was allegedly hit by a car while he was overtaking a bus, sought compensation. Both the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the Kerala High Court dismissed the family's claim, holding that the family had failed to prove the car was actually involved in the accident, even though the Tribunal had separately calculated that Rs 46.3 lakh would have been payable if liability were established.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court re-examined the evidence and found the lower courts had wrongly disbelieved an eyewitness (PW-6) merely because the police had not recorded his statement during the investigation: a ground the Court held was not, by itself, a valid reason to reject an otherwise credible witness. Looking at the damage recorded on the car (broken bumper, grill, and parking light) together with the testimony of the bus driver and a nearby teashop owner, the Court held that, applying the standard of "preponderance of probability" (not the stricter criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt), the evidence could only point to one conclusion: the car was involved in the accident. It set aside the findings of both lower courts and restored the Tribunal's original compensation figure of Rs 46,31,496 with 9% interest (rising to 12% if not paid within three months).
Lesson Learnt
In motor accident compensation cases, claims should be decided on the balance of probability, not on a criminal-trial standard of certainty, and a credible eyewitness's account cannot be discarded simply because the police failed to record it during their investigation.