Compensation Awarded in the Case of Bhati Road Truck Accident

In a significant legal ruling, the Delhi High Court has affirmed the compensation awarded in the case of the Bhati Road truck accident. The Court’s decision holds Desh Raj responsible for driving recklessly, causing the victim’s husband to tragically fall and come under the vehicle’s wheel. This judgment brings closure to the family and reinforces the need for road safety. #DelhiHighCourt #LegalJudgement #MotorAccidentClaim


  • The appellant/Insurance Company filed a statutory appeal challenging the judgment-cum-award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
  • The claim for compensation by the wife, children, and father of the deceased was allowed.
  • A Detailed Accident Report was filed by the SHO of PS Fateh Pur Bert.
  • Statements were recorded by the police, including one from a witness standing 50 meters away from the spot.
  • The witness denied negligence on the part of the deceased and a quarrel with the driver.
  • The case was registered based on the witness statement.
  • Charge sheet was filed against the driver.
  • The witness saw the deceased boarding the truck from the left side, slipping, and being run over by the truck’s wheel.
  • People gathered at the spot, called 100 No PCR, and the deceased was taken to the hospital where he was declared brought dead.
  • Testimony of the deceased’s wife, who was not an eyewitness, was pointed out by the counsel.
  • A case was registered against the driver under IPC sections 279/304-A.


  • The incident took place on Bhati Road, Arya Bhat Tiraha, Delhi at around 4.00 PM
  • The victim’s husband was climbing into the truck with registration number HR 55 B 6988 from the left side
  • The truck was driven rashly and negligently by Desh Raj, leading to the victim’s husband falling on the road and coming under the vehicle’s wheel
  • The observations made by the Tribunal confirmed the factum of the accident and the guilt of Desh Raj in driving recklessly


  • The deceased was covered by the insurance policy and the insurance company is liable for compensation.
  • The compensation awarded was fair and just, considering loss of financial dependency, love and affection, consortium, funeral expenses, and loss of estates.
  • The handwritten cover note provided details of insurance for the offending vehicle.
  • The witnesses presented consistent accounts of the events leading to the accident.
  • The insurer had the opportunity to summon a key witness but did not do so.
  • The insurance policy did not exclude insurance cover for any other person.
  • The driver of the offending vehicle was not aware of the deceased’s attempt to climb onto the truck.
  • The deceased’s age, income, and circumstances were considered in awarding compensation.
  • The accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle.
  • The insurance company is held liable for the compensation awarded.
  • The terms of a contract of insurance can be wider than what is prescribed by statute.
  • This principle was established in the case of Amrit Lal Sood v. Kaushalya Devi Thapar.
  • The decision was made by a Three Judges Bench of the Supreme Court.
  • The learned Tribunal did not make any legal errors in their decision
  • There were six dependents of the deceased, including the father
  • The Tribunal’s approach in law was deemed correct


  • Interim order dated 18.07.2014 is vacated by the Court.
  • Loss of consortium/loss of love and affection assumed at Rs.14,000/- p.m., totaling Rs.2 lacs.
  • Balance amount to be deposited with the Tribunal within four weeks, failure to do so will incur penal interest @ 12% p.a. by the Insurance Company.
  • Appeal is dismissed by the Court.
  • Rs.12 lacs have already been released to the claimants.
  • Rs.25,000/- statutory deposit for appeal to be refunded to the Insurance Company.
  • Balance compensation with interest @ 9% p.a. to be released to the claimants from the date of filing the petition.


Case Number: MAC.APP.-631/2014

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *