The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by the claimants challenging the High Court’s reversal of the Tribunal’s award in a motor accident claim arising from a hit-and-run incident in Rajamma vs M/S Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd on September 26, 2025. The claimants alleged that the sole breadwinner of their family, the husband of the first appellant, died in a road accident, witnessed by a close family associate, and that the offending vehicle’s driver had abandoned the victim under false pretenses.

The Tribunal had originally awarded Rs.16,02,000/- to the claimants, relying primarily on the testimony of of the deceased and eyewitness. The insurance company’s objections, including allegations of fraud and lack of vehicle involvement, were rejected by the Tribunal, which noted the absence of rebuttal evidence and the failure to examine the driver. The High Court, however, reversed the award, questioning the veracity of eyewitness; testimony and the procedural irregularities regarding the FIR, including its initial registration at a police station without jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court noted that the FIR registered at Hebbagodi Police Station, though delayed in transfer, contained a typographical error regarding the time of the accident and did not affect the substantive claim. However, wife’s testimony was found unreliable: her account was inconsistent, she was an unverified chance witness operating a fruit stall, and she failed to properly identify the vehicle or its driver.

The Court also noted that the victim’s daughter was not examined, further weakening the evidentiary basis. On these grounds, the Supreme Court held that the High Court’s findings rejecting the claim were justified. The inconsistencies in witness testimony and lack of supporting evidence undermined the claimants’ case. The appeal was therefore dismissed in its entirety, affirming the High Court’s order and requiring no further intervention.