M.R. Krishna Murthi vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Others

HELD:1.1 In those cases where the victim of the accident is not an earning person but a student, while assessing the compensation for loss of future earning, the focus of the examination would be the career prospect and the likely earning of such a person in future. Where the claimant is pursuing a particular professional course, the poseer would be: what would have been his income had he joined a service commensurating with the said course. That can be the future earning. There may be cases where the victim is not, at that stage, doing any such course to get a particular job. He or she may be studying in a school. In such a case, future career would depend upon multiple factors like the family background, choice/interest of the complainant to pursue a particular career, facilities available to him/her for adopting such a career, the favourable surrounding circumstances to see which would have enabled the claimant to successfully pick up the said career etc. If the chosen field is employment, then the future earning can be taken on the basis of salary and allowances which are payable for such calling. In case, career is a particular profession, the future earning would depend on host of other factors on the basis of which chances to achieve success in such a profession can be ascertained. There may be cases where even a student, the claimant would have made earnings on part-time basis or would have received offer for a particular job. In such cases, these factors would also assume relevance. After ascertaining the likely earning of the victim in the said manner, the nature of injuries and disability suffered as a result thereof would be kept in mind while determining as to how much earning has been affected thereby. Here, impact of injuries on functional disability is to be seen. In case of death of victim, it would result in total loss of earning. In the case of injuries, the nature of disability becomes important. [Para 23][1107-E-H; 1108-A-D]

1.2 The appellant was a student studying in a school. He was not doing any job or was in any vocation and, thus, was not earning anything. The loss of future earning is to be assessed on the said basis. The relevant factors brought on record for the appellant are that the appellant belongs to a family of lawyers as both his parents were senior lawyers practicing in the Supreme Court. Because of his family background, the appellant also wanted to join legal profession, even though at the time of accident, he was studying in school. Having regard to affluent family background, the appellant at the time of accident was studying in prestigious Modern School, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. All these circumstances clearly indicated that the appellant had a bright future and, therefore, his future earnings could not be considered without keeping in view the aforesaid factors. The appellant also produced evidence in respect of his disability. This disability does not indicate much loss of prospects in earning. Of course, his movements are restricted and he needs a Driver as he is not in a position to drive the car himself. This would hinder the earning capacity to some extent, though not significant extent. [Para 17, 24][1100-F-G; 1108-D-G]

N. Manjegowda v. Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited (2014) 3 SCC 584 : [2013] 12

SCR 350 – relied on.

1.3 Though, not very seriously, the functional capacity has been impaired because of the disability suffered by the appellant as the appellant cannot run around like other young advocates of his age. Going by the overall circumstances, in case of the appellant, loss of future earning can be fixed at Rs.5,000/- per month i.e. Rs.60,000/- per annum on which multiplier of 18 is to be applied. Calculated in this manner, the loss future earning comes to Rs.10,80,000/-. The appellant, thus, would be paid another sum of Rs.6,54,000/- under this head along with interest as awarded by the Court below. It is stated that the appellant has volunteered to give this amount to any Government or public charitable organisation working towards road safety. It is left to the appellant to donate the amount to any particular organisation of his choice. Alternatively, it can also be given for MAMCproject by the appellant. [Paras 26 (i)].[1109-G-H; 1110-A-C]

2.1 Focus is to ensure access to justice for road accident victims and also to bring about a mechanism which prevents delays and other obstacles in awarding compensation to road accident victims. The suggestion for establishing a MAMA-Motor Accident Mediation Authority in every District is worthy of acceptance. Whatever steps are taken by the authorities for reducing road accidents, harsh reality is that accidents would keep on happening. There may be a possibility of reducing the number of road accidents, but occurrence thereof cannot be totally eliminated. Such accidents, particularly fatal accidents, would always lead to filing of claims by the victims and/or kith and kin of victims, for compensation. Fatal accidents also trigger prosecution of the driver who was negligent and rash in driving which caused the accident. Insofar as disputes regarding claims are concerned, there is a need to resolve the same at the earliest inasmuch as compensation money may be badly needed by the claimants for so many reasons and delay may bring insurmountable sufferings of various kind. Having regard to the fact that large number of accidents are giving rise to phenomenal quantum jump in such cases, methods need to be adopted for quick resolution. [Para 27][1110-E-H]

2.2 The various directions/recommendations are given: (a) The Government is impressed upon to also consider the feasibility of enacting Mediation Act to take care of various aspects of mediation in general. (b) The Government may examine the feasibility of setting up MAMA by making necessary amendments in the Motor Vehicles Act. For this purpose, it can consider the two flow charts given by the appellant. (c) In the interregnum, NALSA is directed to set up Motor Accident Mediation Cell which can function independently under the aegis of NALSA or can be handed over to MCPC. Such a project should be prepared within a period of two months and it should start functioning immediately thereafter at various levels as suggested in this judgment. The directions contained in order dated November 6, 2017 in Jai Prakash case are reitreated for implementation of the latest Modified Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure. For ensuring such implementation, NALSA is directed to take up the same in coordination and co-operation with various High A Courts. MACAD Scheme shall be implemented by all Claim Tribunals on All India basis. 21 Banks, Members of Indian Banks Assocation, who had taken decision to implement MACAD Scheme would do the same on All India basis. (d) The Government is implied upon to look into the feasibility of framing necessary schemes and for the availability of annuity certificates. This exercise may be done within the period of six months and decision be taken thereupon. (e) Likewise, it is directed that there should be programmes from time to time, in all State Judicial Academies, to sensitizing the Presiding Officers of the Claims Tribunals, Senior Police Officers of the State Police as well as Insurance C Company for the implementation of the said Procedure. [Para 39][1117-C-H; 1118-A-B]

Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., (2010) 10 SCC 254 : [ 2010] 11 SCR 857 ; Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Deo Patodi & Ors., (2009) 13 SCC 123 : [2009] 8 SCR 791 ; New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Ganga Devi & Ors., MAC APP No. 135 of 2008 decided on November 23, 2009 by Delhi High Court ; Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCALE 129 ; Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar & Anr., (2011) 1 SCC 343 : [2010] 13 SCR 179 ; Arun Sondhi v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2001) ACJ 1779 ; Jaiprakash v. National Insurance Company [2009] 16 SCR 710 ; Rajesh Tyagi v. Jaiveer Singh and Others (FAO No. 842 of 2003) – referred to