The appeal challenged the dismissal of the claim by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) and the High Court. The appellants (widow, minor child, and parents of the deceased Ikhbal) sought compensation for the death of Ikhbal in a road accident. The court reversed the findings of the MACT and the High Court, holding that the car was involved in the accident and awarded compensation of Rs. 46,31,496 with 9% interest to the appellants.

1. Accident Details (Para 2-3):

   • Deceased Ikhbal died in an accident while overtaking a KSRTC bus.
   • The appellants claimed that a car driven by respondent no. 2 was involved in the accident.
   • The driver and insurer denied the involvement of the car.

2. MACT Proceedings (Para 5):

   • MACT assessed compensation at Rs. 46,31,496 but dismissed the claim due to lack of evidence proving negligence by respondent no. 2.
   • The High Court affirmed this decision.

3. Appellants' Arguments (Para 6):

   • The appellants argued that the car’s involvement in the accident was established by evidence, which was ignored by the MACT and High Court.

4. Respondents' Arguments (Para 7):

   • Respondent no. 3's counsel argued that no witness directly saw the accident and the findings of the lower courts were correct.

5. Legal Principle (Para 8):

   • The Supreme Court cited Mangla Ram v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. to state that while it ordinarily does not reappreciate evidence under Article 136, it can review findings when they are perverse or erroneous.

6. Evidence Evaluation (Para 9-15):

   • Multiple witnesses, including the bus driver (PW-2), a teashop owner (PW-3), and an eyewitness (PW-6), confirmed the car's involvement.
   • The car sustained damage (Mahazar report) supporting its involvement.

7. Court's Findings (Para 16-17):

   • The Supreme Court held that the evidence pointed to the car's involvement in the accident.
   • The courts below erred by not applying the principle of preponderance of probability in motor accident claims.
   • Compensation was awarded to the appellants.

8. Final Award (Para 17-18):

   • The court awarded Rs. 46,31,496 with 9% interest per annum from the date of filing, failing which, 12% interest would apply.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

• Article 136 of the Constitution of India: Provides the Supreme Court with the power to grant special leave to appeal from any judgment.
• Preponderance of Probability: A principle applicable in motor accident claims where courts consider the most probable version of events rather than requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Ratio Decidendi:

The Supreme Court ruled that in motor accident compensation claims, the principle of preponderance of probability should be applied. The car’s involvement in the accident was evident from witness testimony and the damage report, contrary to the lower courts' findings. This suffices to hold the car responsible and award compensation.