Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:29209 Court No. - 5 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 201 of 2025 Appellant :- National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru. Regional Manager Lko. Respondent :- Smt. Rani And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vaibhav Raj Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard Sri Vaibhav Raj, learned counsel for the appellant. 2. Instant appeal has been filed raising a challenge to the judgment and award dated 22.02.2025 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sitapur in Claim Petition No. 186 of 2019 Inre; Smt. Rani Singh Vs. Mohammad Nabi and Ors whereby the learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- in favour of the claimants. 3. Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts as set forth by the learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company is that an accident is said to have taken place on 04.10.2018 when one Sri Mahesh who was travelling in a Tempo bearing registration no. UP24 D 4712 and was going to Badaun, Suddenly, the front tyre of the tempo came off with the result that the tempo had an accident in which Sri Mahesh Singh sustained severe injuries and died. The wife of the deceased namely Smt. Rani Singh filed the aforesaid claim petition praying for award of compensation. The insurance company put in appearance and denid the accident. 4. Learned trial Court framed nine issues of which the relevant issues with which the instant appeal is concerned were as to whether the said accident occurred on 04.10.2018 in which Sri Mahesh Singh had died; as to whether the vehicle was insured; whether the driver of the vehicle had a valid and effective driving license and as to what compensation, the claimant is entitled to receive. 5. Learned tribunal after thoroughly examining the entire issues, concluded that an accident had taken place in which Sri Mahesh Singh died and as consequently awarded an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the claimant. Being aggrieved, the insurance company is before this Court. 6. The grounds as urged by the learned counsel for the appellant while raising a challenge to the impugned award are (a) no First Information Report had been lodged by the persons pertaining to the said accident (b) only General Diary was registered after twenty days of the alleged incident (c) no charge sheet was filed pertaining to the said incident (d) only two witnesses appeared before the learned tribunal namely the wife and the son in law of the deceased' brother and no other persons who were injured in the said accident were produced before the learned tribunal (e) only registration certificate of the vehicle and no other papers of the said vehicle were filed. 7. No other ground has been urged. 8. As regards, non lodging of the First Information Report and non filing of charge sheet and the General Diary being registered after twenty days of alleged accident, the same may not detain the Court keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of of Bimla Devi and Others Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and Others-2009 (13) SCC 530 wherein the Apex Court has held that in a claim petition, the accident is only to be proved on the basis of preponderance of probability and nothing further is required. Accordingly, the said ground is rejected. 9. So far as ground of only two witnesses, who were the wife and son in law of the deceased's brother, having been produced and no other person who was injured in the said accident being produced, suffice it to say that there is no bar under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 that the wife or the real relatives of the claimants cannot depose before the learned tribunal in a claim petition. Once an accident has occurred it cannot be expected that instead of taking the injured for treatment to the hospital, the names and addresses of the other co-passenger are to be noted in order to make out a case for seeking compensation before the learned tribunal. Thus, the aforesaid argument as advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant does not convince this Court in order to put any shadow over the alleged accident. 10. So far as the ground that only registration certificate of the vehicle was filed and no other papers were filed, suffice it to say that from the averments made in the claim petition as indicated in the award passed by the learned tribunal it emerges that vehicle number had clearly been indicated which resulted in the learned tribunal indicating the name of the owner in whose name the vehicle was registered and also the policy number of the vehicle. Although, it was disputed by the insurance company that the vehicle is not insured with them but no evidence in this regard was led by the insurance company which issue has been discussed threadbare and decided accordingly. Thus, the said ground is also rejected. 10. Keeping in view the aforesaid discussion, no case for interference is made out. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 11. The statutory deposit of Rs. 25,000/- be remitted to the learned tribunal within two weeks for being disbursed along with compensation to the claimant as per rules. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Pachhere/- Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench