FIR author not examined – Non-reporting of accident to police by eye-witness -- Eye witness (AW-3) accompanied deceased to hospital in his car -- It is quite natural that such a person who had accompanied the injured to the hospital for immediate medical aid, could not have simultaneously gone to the police station to lodge the FIR -- High Court ought not to have drawn any adverse inference against the witness for his failure to report the matter to Police.

(SC) Decided on: 08.12.2020

Disability -- No doctor has been examined qua the disability suffered by the claimant/appellant -- Award is also silent as to the nature of the injuries -- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is a beneficial piece of legislation, Court deemed it just and proper to remand the present case to the Tribunal to be decided afresh.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 13.03.2020

Inability of the witness to identify the age of the pillion rider cannot, per se, be a militating factor to discard his entire version -- Approach in examining the evidence in accident claim cases is not to find fault with non-examination of some “best” eye witness in the case but to analyse the evidence already on record to ascertain whether that is sufficient to answer the matters in issue on the touchstone of preponderance of probability -- Tribunal was right in accepting the claim of the appellants even without the deposition of the pillion rider, since the other evidence on record was good enough to prima facie establish the manner in which the accident had occurred and the identity of the parties involved in the accident.

(SC) Decided on: 14.02.2019

To prove the occurrence claimant examined “S” as a witness of the occurrence -- Witness was cross-examined on behalf of the appellant, but he did not allow himself to dither away from the mainstay of the case -- Even in the judgment in criminal case the court acquitted the appellant by giving him a benefit of doubt – Award of compensation upheld.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 15.01.2015