Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
L. NAGESWARA RAO, HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.
Basudev Das – Appellant
Versus
Pradyumna Mohanty and Ors. – Respondents
CA Nos. 6439-6440 of 2019
Decided On : 20-08-2019
Compensation - Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - The court enhanced the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal by 25 percent, in line with the judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi 2017 ACJ 2700 (SC), due to the appellant being self-employed.
Fact of the Case:
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded compensation to the appellant for the amputation of his left leg in a road accident. The High Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the insurance company, reducing the compensation, and dismissed the appellant's appeal for enhancement of compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal was just and enhanced it by 25 percent due to the appellant being self-employed.
Issues: The issues involved the appeal filed by the insurance company and the appellant's appeal for enhancement of compensation, as well as the lack of reasons provided by the High Court for its decisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi 2017 ACJ 2700 (SC), which entitled the appellant to 25 percent addition to the compensation due to being self-employed.
Final Decision: The compensation awarded to the appellant was enhanced by 25 percent, and the appeals were disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
L. Nageswara Rao and Hemant Gupta, JJ.
1. Leave granted.
2. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal ('MACT') allowed the claim filed by the Appellant and awarded compensation of Rs. 11,36,000 as his left leg was amputated in a road accident There were two appeals filed before the High Court. The appeal filed by the Respondent No. 2 insurance company was partly allowed and the compensation was reduced to an amount of Rs. 9,36,000. The appeal filed by the Appellant for enhancement of the compensation was dismissed.
3. No reason was given by the High Court for dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant. Even in the appeal that was filed by the insurance company, the High Court did not assign any reason for reducing the compensation from Rs. 11,36,000 to Rs. 9,36,000.
4. After examining the material on record and after hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that compensation awarded by the MACT is just. That apart the Appellant is entitled to 25 percent addition to the compensation that was awarded by the MACT, according to the judgment of this Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi 2017 ACJ 2700 (SC), in view of the fact that he was self-employed.
5. The compensation awarded to the Appellant stands enhanced by 25 percent over and above what was granted to him by the MACT.
6. The appeals stand disposed of.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
