No Plea, No Issue, No Evidence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Rejects Insurer’s Contributory Negligence Argument in Triple Fatal Accident
Case Name: United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ayush and Others
Date of Judgment: 13 February 2026
Citation: FAO-2026-2022
Bench: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Sudeepthi Sharma
Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that a plea of contributory negligence cannot be entertained at the appellate stage where no such plea was raised before the Tribunal, no issue was framed, and no evidence was led to establish it. The Court reiterated that in motor accident claims, negligence is determined on preponderance of probabilities and findings based on credible eye-witness testimony warrant no interference.
Summary: The Insurance Company filed four appeals challenging the common award dated 12.01.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jind, primarily on two grounds: (i) erroneous finding on negligence, and (ii) excessive quantum of compensation.
The accident occurred on 30.07.2018 near Khanpur Koliyan, District Kurukshetra. A Honda City car driven by Satish Sharma collided with a Truck/Trolla bearing registration No. PB-11AG-9186. The impact was catastrophic: Sunita Sharma and minor Aanya died at the spot, while Satish Sharma and Prem Lata succumbed during treatment. Minor Ayush and other occupants sustained grievous injuries.
The Tribunal relied heavily upon the testimony of eye-witness Devi Dayal Jangra (PW-5), who was also the author of FIR No. 374 dated 30.07.2018. He categorically deposed that the truck driver rashly changed lanes and suddenly stopped in front of the car, causing it to slide underneath the truck. His testimony remained unshaken in cross-examination and stood corroborated by the FIR, site plan, recovery memo and subsequent criminal proceedings.
Before the High Court, the Insurance Company argued that the deceased car driver attempted to overtake the truck and failed to maintain safe distance, thereby contributing to the accident. Reliance was placed upon Nishan Singh v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., 2018 INSC 341.
The High Court rejected this contention on multiple grounds:Firstly, no plea of contributory negligence was taken in the written statement before the Tribunal;Secondly, no issue on contributory negligence was framed;Thirdly, neither the driver nor the owner of the offending vehicle entered the witness box to substantiate such defence;Fourthly, no evidence was led by the Insurance Company to prove contributory negligence.
The Court relied upon the Supreme Court decision in M. Nithya & Ors. v. SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. (arising out of SLP(C) No. 833-834 of 2023), holding that in absence of a framed issue, such plea cannot be entertained to reduce compensation.
The Court further observed that in motor accident cases, the standard of proof is preponderance of probabilities and not proof beyond reasonable doubt, referring to Anita Sharma v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. The finding of sole negligence against the truck driver was found to be well-reasoned and based on reliable evidence.
As regards quantum, the Court noted that the issue had already been addressed in separate appeals arising from the same award.
Decision: All four appeals were dismissed. The findings of the Tribunal holding the driver of the offending truck solely negligent were upheld. The award dated 12.01.2022 was affirmed.