Motor accident: Compensation – Enhancement – Self employed, skilled carpenter met with motor accident – Income taken as 4050/- and disability assessed at 90% - Award of Rs.12,81,228/- as compensation by the tribunal, however the High Court awarded an additional amount of Rs.2,19,000/- – On appeal held: Claim of the victim that his earnings were Rs. 6,000/- pm cannot be regarded as being unreasonable or contrary to a realistic assessment of the situation on the date of the accident – As regards, the benefit of future prospects, being self-employed person, addition of 40 per cent of the established income should be made where the age of the victim at the time of the accident was below 40 years, thus, the victim entitled to an enhancement of Rs. 2400/- towards loss of future prospects – Victim has suffered a serious disability in which he has suffered a loss of the use of both his hands – He is unable to even eat or to attend to a visit to the toilet without the assistance of an attendant – Disability is indeed total – Thus, the victim awarded a total sum of Rs. 25,38,308/- by way of compensation, payable on account of the loss of income, including future prospects, pain, suffering and loss of amenities, medical expenses, with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum on the compensation from the date of the filing of the claim petition. Appellant-self employed skilled carpenter met with a motor accident. Tribunal took the monthly income of the appellant as Rs.4,050/- and assessed the disability at 90%. The compensation of Rs.12,81228/- was awarded for the injuries suffered by the victim. However the High Court awarded an additional amount of Rs.2,19,000/- with interest of 7.5 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim. Hence, the instant appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD : 1.1 The claim of the appellant that his earnings were Rs. 6,000/- per month cannot be discarded. This claim cannot be regarded as being unreasonable or contrary to a realistic assessment of the situation on the date of the accident. As held in in Pranay Sethi case that the benefit of future prospects should not be confined only to those who have a permanent job and would extend to self-employed individuals. In the case of a self-employed person, an addition of 40 per cent of the established income should be made where the age of the victim at the time of the accident was below 40 years. Hence, in the instant case, the appellant would be entitled to an enhancement of Rs. 2400/towards loss of future prospects. [Paras 9, 10] [27-B-C, D-E]
1.2 In making the computation, the court must be mindful of the fact that the appellant suffered a serious disability in which he has suffered a loss of the use of both his hands. For a person engaged in manual activities, it requires no stretch of imagination to understand that a loss of hands is a complete deprivation of the ability to earn. Nothing at least in the facts of the case–can restore lost hands. But the measure of compensation must reflect a genuine attempt of the law to restore the dignity of the being. The yardsticks of compensation should not be so abysmal as to lead one to question whether the law values human life. If it does, as it must, it must provide a realistic recompense for the pain of loss and the trauma of suffering. Awards of compensation are not law’s doles. In a discourse of rights, they constitute entitlements under law. The conversations about law must shift from a paternalistic subordination of the individual to an assertion of enforceable rights as intrinsic to human dignity. [Para 11] [27-E-G]
1.2 The tribunal noted that the appellant was unable to even eat or to attend to a visit to the toilet without the assistance of an attendant. In this background, it would be a denial of justice to compute the disability at 90 per cent. The disability is indeed total. Having regard to the age of the appellant, the tribunal applied a multiplier of 18. In the circumstances, the compensation payable to the appellant on account of the loss of income, including future prospects, would be Rs. 18,14,400/-. In addition to this amount, the appellant should be granted an amount of Rs. 2 lakhs on account of pain, suffering and loss of amenities and Rs. 3 lakhs towards future medical expenses. The amount awarded by the tribunal towards medical expenses (Rs. 98,908/-); for extra nourishment (Rs. 25,000/-) and for attendant’s expenses (Rs. 1 lakh) is maintained. The appellant is thus awarded a total sum of Rs. 25,38,308/- by way of compensation, with interest at the rate of 9 % p.a. on the compensation from the date of the filing of the claim petition. The liability to pay compensation has been fastened by the tribunal and by the High Court on the insurer, owner and driver jointly and severally which is affirmed. [Para 11] [28-A-D] National Insurance Company Limited v Pranay Sethi (2017) 13 SCALE 12 ; Sri Laxman @ Laxman Mourya v Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (2011) 12 SCALE 658 ; K Suresh v New India
Assurance Company Ltd. [2012] 11 SCR 414 :
(2012) 12 SCC 274 ; Ramesh Chandra v Randhir Singh [1990] 3 SCR 1 : (1990) 3 SCC 723 ; B Kothandapani v Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited [2011] 6 SCR 791 : (2011) 6 SCC 420 ; Govind Yadav v New India Insurance Company Limited (2011) 10 SCC 683 ; R D Hattangadi v Pest Control (India) (Pvt) Ltd. [1995] 1 SCR 75 : (1995) 1 SCC 551 : Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences v Prasanth S Dhananka [2009] 9 SCR 313 : (2009) 6 SCC 1 ; Reshma Kumari v Madam Mohan [2009] 11 SCR 305 : (2009) 13 SCC
422 ; Arvind Kumar Mishra v New India Assurance Company Limited [2010] 11 SCR 857 : (2010) 10 SCC
254 ; Raj Kumar v Ajay Kumar [2010] 13 SCR 179 : (2011) 1 SCC 343 ; Subulaxmi v MD Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation [2012] 9 SCR 962 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.