[Motor Accident] Adverse Inference Can Be Drawn Against Insurer On Failure To Rebut Evidence: Jharkhand HC Upholds ₹11.45 Lakh Compensation
The Jharkhand High Court has upheld the award of ₹11,45,932 granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Dhanbad, to the widow of a carpenter who succumbed to injuries sustained in a fatal motorcycle accident.
The court emphasised that failure of the insurance company to summon key witnesses or rebut the evidence presented by the claimants resulted in an adverse inference being drawn against it, reaffirming established principles of evidence law and the insurer's liability under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Justice Subhash Chand presiding over the case, observed, “The I.O. after concluding the investigation also filed charge-sheet which is also on record and this charge-sheet was filed in the very case crime number against the driver of the offending motorcycle namely Mukhtar Ansari. In the very charge-sheet Md. Khalid Ashraf is also shown the eye-witness of the accident. The postmortem report also corroborates the oral evidence and F.I.R. version.”
“On behalf of Insurance Company to rebut this evidence admittedly no contrary evidence has been adduced oral or documentary,” Justice Chand added.
The above ruling came in a Miscellaneous Appeal filed by ICICI Lombard General Insurance. As per the factual matrix of the case, the deceased, Ijarat Ansari, was struck by a motorcycle driven rashly and negligently, resulting in severe injuries that led to his death. Ansari, a carpenter earning ₹700 per day, was survived by his wife, who filed a claim petition.
On behalf of the owner of the motorcycle, a written statement was filed whereby he denied any rash or negligent driving, stating that the motorcycle was operated with a valid and effective driving license. It was further contended that liability, if any, should be borne by the insurance company.
The insurer also filed a written statement, arguing that the burden of proof rested on the claimants and the vehicle owner, and that any breach of policy conditions would absolve the insurer of liability.
The Tribunal, based on the evidence, awarded compensation of ₹11,45,932 along with 7.5% interest to the claimants, holding the insurance company liable.
Aggrieved by the Tribunal's decision, the insurer, ICICI Lombard General Insurance, preferred an appeal before the High Court, arguing that the accident was not caused by the motorcycle but by a bus, as suggested in the inquest report. The insurance company also alleged that the Tribunal failed to consider this fact and wrongly imposed liability on it.
Opposing the appeal, the claimants and the motorcycle owner defended the Tribunal's findings. The Tribunal concluded that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the offending motorcycle, a conclusion upheld by the High Court.
The Court observed in its judgement, “There being laches on the part of the Insurance Company by neither adducing any contrary evidence nor moving any application to call the Investigating Officer of Govindpur P.S. Case No. 05 of 2022, the adverse inference would be drawn against the Insurance Company for the same; while from the documentary and oral evidence on record adduced by the claimant this fact is well proved that the said accident was caused by the offending motorcycle No. JH-10BQ9650.”
The Court upheld the Tribunal's finding that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle, ruling in favor of the claimant and against the owner and the Insurance Company, requiring no interference.
And in view of the same, the Court dismissed the appeal while upholding the award passed by the Tribunal
Case Title: The Legal Manager, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Sundari Bibi and Ors
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 173