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

2022 Supreme(SC) 1823

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.S. Bopanna, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ.
C.L. Harikumar – Appellant
Versus
M. Pazhaniswamy & Anr. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No(s). 5927 of 2022 Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 14352 of 2019
Decided On : 02-09-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Renjith B. Marar, Advocate, Ms. Lakshmi N. Kaimal, Advocate, Mr. Arun Poomuli, Advocate, M/s. Aswathi S Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant.;

The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion to grant a global enhancement of compensation based on the circumstances of the case, even in the absence of specific evidence supporting a higher rate of disability.

Headnote:

Compensation - Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - Income of the Appellant - Rs. 2,500/- per month - Rs.3,40,900/- compensation - Enhanced to Rs. 5,44,300/- - Further enhancement sought due to amputation - Total compensation determined at Rs. 6,00,000/- - Rs.55,700/- to be deposited with interest at 7.5% p.a. - Appeal disposed of

Fact of the Case:

The appellant appealed the judgment of the High Court seeking further enhancement of compensation after the High Court had already enhanced it from Rs.3,40,900 to Rs. 5,44,300 based on the appellant's income. The appellant contended that due to amputation, a higher rate of disability should have been considered.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was no evidence to indicate that the appellant was a tractor driver who had lost his avocation and could not do any other work to arrive at a higher rate of disability. However, considering the amputation and the pain and agony suffered, the court granted a global enhancement and determined the total compensation at Rs. 6,00,000.

Issues: Enhancement of compensation, consideration of disability due to amputation

Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the evidence and the appellant's contentions regarding the disability due to amputation, and while finding no evidence to support a higher rate of disability, granted a global enhancement based on the amputation and pain suffered.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the appeal and ordered the respondent to deposit the enhanced portion of the compensation with interest, and allowed the respondent to recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle as ordered by the High Court.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant is before this Court assailing the judgment dated 01.08.2018, passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in MACA. No. 631/2012. Through this appeal, the appellant is seeking further enhancement of the compensation.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant,a perusal of the records indicate that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (for short 'MACT') having considered the evidence on record, had reckoned the income of the appellant at Rs. 2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred Only) per month and has thereafter, arrived at the compensation of Rs.3,40,900/- (Three Lakhs Forty Thousand Nine Hundred Only) with interest.

4. The High Court, while taking into consideration the grounds urged in the appeal, has enhanced the compensation to Rs. 5,44,300/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Forty Four Thousand Three Hundred Only) by reckoning the income of the petitioner at Rs.4,500/- (Rupees Four Thousand Five Hundred Only) per month.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant while seeking further enhancement, has contended that the appellant was a tractor driver, due to the injuries suffered in the accident his hand was amputated and therefore, the disability ought to have been taken at a higher percentage than the one reckoned by the MACT.

6. Having given our thoughtful consideration to the said submission, we find that there is no evidence placed before the MACT to indicate that the petitioner was in fact a tractor driver who has lost his avocation subsequently and cannot do any other work so as to arrive at any higher rate of disability.

7. Be that as it may, taking into consideration that the hand of the appellant was amputated and has undergone certain pain and agony, it would be appropriate to grant global enhancement and determine the total compensation at Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Only) as against Rs. 5,44,300/-(Rupees Five Lakhs Forty Four Thousand Three Hundred Only) granted by the High Court. The enhanced portion amounting to Rs.55,700/- (Rupees Fifty Five Thousand Seven Hundred Only) shall be deposited with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition before the MACT by the Respondent No.3 (United India Insurance Co. Ltd.) within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. The Respondent No.3 (United India Insurance Co. Ltd.) shall be entitled to recover the said amount from the owner of the vehicle, as was ordered by the High Court.

8. The appeal is accordingly, disposed of.

9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed 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