The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd v. Suman Devi And 6 Others

Shri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company is present. The instant appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the Insurance Company against the Judgement and Award dated 23.06.2025 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Farrukhabad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 117/2023 (Suman Devi and others v. The O.I.C.L. and others), whereby for the untimely death of Vijay Kumar in an accident which occurred on 05.03.2023, a compensation of Rs. 33,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 7% per annum has been awarded by the Tribunal to the claimants. The deceased died subsequently on 20.03.2023. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that there is no independent witness of the alleged accident. The owner and driver of the offending vehicle were in collusion with the claimants, as such, they had admitted the factum of accident in their written submissions which is not binding on the Insurance Company. Learned counsel submitted that in view of this, the Tribunal has erred in recording a finding that the accident ocurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. It is further submitted that the accident took place on

05.03.2023 but the FIR was registered after an inordinate delay on

05.05.2023 which was an afterthought which itself proved that there was no eye-witness of the alleged accident. Learned counsel submitted that the Tribunal has erred in appreciating the above facts correctly, as such, the 2 FAFO No. 2322 of 2025 appeal be admitted and thereafter heard and decided on merits. I have heard learned counsel for the Insurance Company and perused the record. From the perusal of the record, it appears that the owner and driver of the offending vehicle no. UP 13 BT 4965 had submitted their written statements before the Tribunal in which, they admitted that the alleged accident indeed occurred but it was submitted that it was not a deliberate act. They further pleaded that the offending vehicle was insured on the date of the accident with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, as such, if any liability was fastened on them, then it was bound to be indemnified by the Insurance Company.

It also appears that the FIR regarding the alleged accident was registered on 05.05.2023 regarding which a proper explanation has been submitted that since Vijay Kumar was seriously injured and in his treatment, his family members remained busy, as such, the FIR could not be registered promptly. The explanation submitted by the claimants for getting the FIR registered belatedly is sufficient and on this ground, the factum of accident cannot be disputed since it has already been admitted by the owner and driver of the offending vehicle. It is also apparent that after investigation, charge sheet has been submitted against the driver of the offending vehicle. PW-2 Surendra has proved the accident and negligence of the offending vehicle. In view of the above oral and documentary evidence on record, the factum of accident cannot be disputed by the Insurance Company. Moreover, the owner and driver of the offending vehicle have not appeared in the witness box to dispute that there was no negligence on their part in the alleged accident, as such, the claimants have discharged their burden and have proved that the accident indeed occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle.