Authority: High Court at Calcutta, 1st Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Civil Appellate Jurisdiction

Order Date: 15.09.2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellant/Claimant – Bijuli Konwar & Anr.; Respondent – National Insurance Co. Ltd. (also appellant in FMAT (MV) 102/2024). Two appeals (FMA 49/2024 by claimants and FMAT (MV) 102/2024 by insurer) were heard together as they challenged the same Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT) award dated 31 July 2024.
  • Background: Dehi Konwar (ex‑Fireman, Grade‑I, MES) suffered a road‑traffic accident on 20 December 2014 and died subsequently. Claimants filed a claim on 11 May 2015 seeking Rs 30,27,700 plus 6 % interest per annum. MACT awarded Rs 27,79,124 in equal shares to the claimants.
  • Contentions: Claimants argued the tribunal omitted spousal and parental consortium (Rs 40,000 each) and failed to grant interest under Section 171 MV Act. They also contended the insurer had not produced the driver/owner of the alleged vehicle. The insurer counter‑claimed that the vehicle cited (WB‑74K‑3887) was not involved; the FIR and initial complaint recorded a different registration (WB‑74Z‑0966). The insurer emphasized lack of independent eye‑witnesses and inconsistencies in the complaint and charge‑sheet.
  • Evidence: Eye‑witness P.W. 2 (Subrata Sarkar) identified WB‑74K‑3887 as the offending motorcycle; however, his name was absent from the charge‑sheet. The original FIR (case no. 363/2014) and complaint dated 22 December 2014 listed WB‑74Z‑0966. A second complaint dated 13 April 2015 corrected the vehicle number to WB‑74K‑3887, but this was not reflected in the charge‑sheet or the claim application. The court noted that the claimant failed to produce credible, consistent proof of the specific vehicle’s involvement.
  • Legal Framework: Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act requires the claimant to establish the identity of the offending vehicle and driver on a pre‑ponderance of probability basis. The court referred to several Supreme Court and High Court precedents (e.g., Usha Devi, Raj Kumar Das, Kulsum Begam Molla, Sithara N.S. & Ors.) emphasizing that inconsistent vehicle numbers and lack of independent witnesses justify adverse inference.

Final Outcome

  • The award dated 31 July 2024 passed by the MACT is set aside.
  • Appeal filed by the claimant (FMA 49/2024) is dismissed.
  • Appeal filed by National Insurance Co. Ltd. (FMAT (MV) 102/2024) is allowed.
  • Any compensation amount, if already deposited by the insurer, is to be refunded to National Insurance Co. Ltd.
  • All pending applications, if any, are to be disposed of.
  • Certified copies may be issued upon proper application.

Topics: Motor Accident Claim, Insurance Litigation