SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(SC) 1327

2009(5) Supreme 774
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.B. Sinha and Cyriac Joseph, JJ.
Priya Vasant Kalgutkar — Appellant
versus
Murad Shaikh & Ors. — Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 4795 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.18494 of 2007)
Decided on : 29-07-2009

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :P. V. Viswanth Shetty, Sr. Adv., Sharan Thakur, Murth Naik, D. S. Thakur, Dr. Sushil Balwada, Advocates.
For the Respodents :Dr. Meera Agarwal, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
Compensation for the injuries suffered by a person in a motor vehicle accident can be determined either on the basis of the actual damages suffered or upon application of the structured formula.

Headnote:Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 166 – Appellant a young girl of nine years sustained injuries in a motor accident – Tribunal opining that permanent disability suffered by her would be 10%, awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/-on said ground – Appeal – High Court, without assigning any reason, enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs.1,12,000/- Plea of appellant that High Court committed a serious error in awarding only a sum of Rs.1,12,000/- without taking into consideration her prospect of marriage – No dispute that appellant was a child at that time – She had no earning – What amount could be awarded towards future loss of earning or prospective loss of earning could not have been determined on the basis of any legal principle- Compensation for the injuries suffered by a person in a motor vehicle accident can be determined either on the basis of the actual damages suffered or upon application of the structured formula – Although for the purpose of invoking the provisions of Section 163A of the Act, a legal principle may be found in the Second Schedule thereof – The Second Schedule provides that where no income is proved, notional income for the purpose of payment of compensation to those who had no income prior to accident, a sum of Rs.15,000/- per annum would be considered as the multiplicand – The multiplier which was required to be applied would be 15-Held amount of compensation granted by High Court appeared to be adequate in absence of any evidence having brought on record as to the actual damages – Appeal dismissed. (Paras 7 to 10)

       Facts of the Case :

        1. Appellant a young girl of nine years sustained injuries in a motor accident hereinin the instant case. Tribunal opining that permanent disability suffered by her would be 10%, awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/-on said ground. On Appeal. High Court, without assigning any reason, enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs.1,12,000/.

        2. Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of The Court :

        No dispute that appellant was a child at that time. She had no earning.What amount could be awarded towards future loss of earning or prospective loss of earning could not have been determined on the basis of any legal principle. Compensation for the injuries suffered by a person in a motor vehicle accident can be determined either on the basis of the actual damages suffered or upon application of the structured formula. Although for the purpose of invoking the provisions of Section 163A of the Act, a legal principle may be found in the Second Schedule thereof. The Second Schedule provides that where no income is proved, notional income for the purpose of payment of compensation to those who had no income prior to accident, a sum of Rs.15,000/- per annum would be considered as the multiplicand. The multiplier which was required to be applied would be 15.Held amount of compensation granted by High Court appeared to be adequate in absence of any evidence having brought on record as to the actual damages. Appeal dismissed.

       Result : Appeal dismissed.

       .

JUDGMENT

S.B. Sinha, J.—

1. Leave granted.

2. Appellant is a young girl. She met with an accident on or about 20.9.1999 while she was aged only 9 years. In the said accident she suffered the following injuries, as stated in the application filed on her behalf before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal :

1. There is swelling deformity & fracture of middle 3rd of Lt. thigh (femur shaft).

2. Abrasion over left frontal region.

3. Abrasion over Rt. Lateral aspect.”

3. She was treated by two doctors. According to one of them, namely, Dr. Mukund, who examined himself as PW3, she suffered 10% to 15% of disability whereas according to the other doctor, Dr. Shivanand, she suffered 20% to 25% of physical disability in her left lower limb. An amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was claimed by her by way of compensation in the claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter called and referred to for the sake of brevity as ‘the Act’). The Tribunal, however, having regard to the evidences brought on record, opining that permanent disability suffered by her would be 10%, a sum of Rs.40,000/- awarded on the said ground. The total amount of compensation determined was a sum of Rs.72,785/- details of which are as under :

“Rs.18,000/- towards pain and sufferings and agony, Rs. 12,460 towards diet and attendant charges and Rs.323/- were awarded towards medical expenses.”

4. On an appeal preferred thereagainst, the High Court, without assigning any reason, enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs.1,12,000/-, stating :

“Petitioner could be awarded Rs.30,000/- for pain and agony, Rs.10,000/- for medical and incidental expenses relating to treatment, Rs.15,000/- for loss of amenities and discomfort on account of disability, Rs.27,000/- (1500 X 18) for loss of future earnings on account of disability and Rs.20,000/- for loss of marriage prospects on account of disability. In all, the petitioner is entitled to the compensation of Rs.1,12,000/- as against Rs.72,785/- awarded by the Tribunal. On the enhanced compensation, the interest payable shall be 6% p.a. from the date of petition till payment.”

5. Appellant being aggrieved by and dissatisfied therewith is before us.

6. Mr. P.V.V. Shetty, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, would contend that the High Court committed a serious error in awarding only a sum of Rs.1,12,000/- without taking into consideration her prospect of marriage. The amount of compensation on the basis of notional income should not have been determined, urging that even if she was to work as a labourer, she would have earned at Rs.4,000/- per month.

7. Indisputably, she was a child at that time. She had no earning. What amount could be awarded towards future loss of earning or prospective loss of earning could not have been determined on the basis of any legal principle. Compensation for the injuries suffered by a person in a motor vehicle accident can be determined either on the basis of the actual damages suffered or upon application of the structured formula. Although for the purpose of invoking the provisions of Section 163A of the Act, a legal principle may be found in the Second Schedule thereof. The Second Schedule provides that where no income is proved, notional income for the purpose of payment of compensation to those who had no income prior to accident, a sum of Rs.15,000/- per annum would be considered as the multiplicand. The multiplier which was required to be applied would be 15. Paragraph 4 and 5 of the said Schedule reads as under :

“4. General damages in case of injuries and disabilities—

(i) Pain and sufferings :

(a) Grievous injuries Rs.5,000

(b) Non-grievous injuries Rs.1,000

(ii) Medical expenses—actual expenses Incurred supported by bills/vouchers But not exceeding as onetime Payment Rs.15,000

5. Disability in non-fatal accidents—The following compensation shall be payable in case of disability to the victim arising out of











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top