IMPORTANT POINT
Once the permanent disability is fixed, taking into consideration, its impact on the employment/profession of the claimant, the compensation has to be awarded.

JUDGMENT

N.V. RAMANA, J.

These appeals by special leave are directed against the Judgment passed by the High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at Dharwad in M.F.A. No. 4502 of 2007 C/W. M.F.A. No. 3293 of 2007.

2. The appellant is the claimant. He filed claim petition being M.V.C. No. 515 of 2004 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hubli, stating that he is B.E. Degree holder in Metallurgy. He is aged 24 years and was working as Quality Engineer in Hospet Steels Ltd. On 13.04.2004 while he was returning to his home from the company he met with an accident. In the accident, he sustained grievous and fracture injuries to the knee and also left hand. He was taken to a hospital in Hubli for treatment, where his left leg was amputated. He was in the said hospital as an inpatient till June, 2004. Thereafter, he took treatment at Tulasidas Gopalji Charitable and Dhakleswar Temple Trust and All India Institute of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Bombay and he is still under treatment and presently walking with the assistance of an artificial limb.

3. According to him, due to amputation of his left leg, he suffered 100% permanent disability. At the time of accident, he was getting monthly salary of Rs.17,200/ – .as an Engineer. Because of the disability, he had to resign his job as an Engineer and take up a desk job in Industrial Development Bank of India. Being a bachelor, he has lost prospects of getting married. He thus laid the claim for a total compensation of Rs.40,75,000/ – under different heads for the injuries sustained by him.

4. The respondent resisted the claim of the appellant. The Tribunal considering the evidence placed by the appellant, both oral and documentary, awarded in all Rs.30,60,160/ – as compensation to the appellant under different heads. Against the said award, both the appellant as well as the respondent filed appeals before the High Court of Karnataka, the appellant seeking enhancement, while the respondent for reduction. The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant and partly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent and reduced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.30,60,160/ – to Rs. 6,32,000/ – .

5. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant at the time of accident, was a young boy of 24 years age and was unmarried. He completed his Engineering in Metallurgy and was working in a private company as Quality Engineer and was getting Rs.17,200/ – p.m. The appellant is very intelligent, and because of amputation of his left leg above the knee, he suffered more than 80% permanent disability, and his future became very bleak. The appellant had to resign his job as an Engineer and take up a desk job in a private Bank, which he may lose due to recession in the economy. However, the High Court has without any valid and proper reason, without considering the above facts and without appreciating the evidence properly, has drastically reduced the just and reasonable compensation awarded by the Tribunal. He thus prayed that in the facts and circumstances of the case, just and reasonable compensation be granted to the appellant.

6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent supported the judgment of the High Court insofar as it reduced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, and further contended that the reduced compensation awarded by the High Court being just and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case, needs no further enhancement.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent.

8. The fact that the appellant suffered injuries in the accident is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the appellant is B.E. Degree holder in Metallurgy and was working as Quality Engineer in Hospet Steels Ltd. Though the appellant contended that at the time of accident he was earning Rs.17,200/ – per mon