Synopsis

The insurance company appealed against a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) award that held it liable to pay compensation for the death of Garv Sehgal, who was a passenger in the insured Ford Eco Sport car. The insurer contended that the deceased was himself driving the vehicle at the time of the accident, and therefore the claim should be dismissed. The MACT, after considering CCTV footage, the FIR, and the testimony of witnesses, held that it was more probable that Akshay Jain (the owner’s son) was driving. The High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the standard of proof in motor accident claims is preponderance of probabilities, and that the insurer could not be exonerated.

Court: High Court of Delhi
Coram: Anish Dayal, J.
Date: April 1, 2026
Citation: Not explicitly provided (likely 2026:DHC:xxxx)
Core Law: Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Sections 166, 173; Tort Law – Negligence, Standard of Proof (Preponderance of Probabilities)

2. Legal Framework

• Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Sections 166 (claim for compensation), 173 (appeals against award).

• Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Standard of proof – preponderance of probabilities (not beyond reasonable doubt) in civil proceedings including claim petitions.

• Tort Law – Negligence: Determination of driver/liability based on circumstantial evidence.

• Relevant Precedents: None cited in the judgment; the court applied the settled principle of preponderance of probabilities.

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.