Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.23 seconds)Mangal Ram Prajapat vs The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. on 17 October, 2011
9. We have considered the submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.
The Supreme Court in 'MANGAL RAM VS. ORIENTAL
INSURANCE CO.', (2018) 5 SCC 656 has held that the
proceeding under the Act has to be decided on the basis of
preponderance of probabilities and claimant is not required
to prove the accident beyond reasonable doubt.
Dulcina Fernandes & Ors vs Joaquim Xavier Cruz & Anr on 8 October, 2013
The court
reiterated the principles laid down in DULCINA
FERNANDES V. JOAQUIM XAVIER CRUZ, (2013) 10
SCC 646 and held that non
12
examination of witness per se cannot be treated as fatal to
the claim set up before the tribunal. In other words, the
approach of the Tribunal should be holistic analysis of the
entire pleadings and evidence by applying the test of
preponderance of probabilities. It was held that it was
necessary to be borne in mind that strict proof of an
accident caused by a particular bus in a particular manner
may not be possible to be done by the claimants. The court
restated that the settled principle is that the evidence of the
claimants ought to be examined on the touchstone of
preponderance of probabilities and certainly the standard of
proof beyond reasonable doubt could not be have been
applied.
Section 173 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
1