1. Motor accident claim for compensation enhancement — functional disability and loss of earnings — Motor Vehicles Act. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 )
Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(SC) 2008
THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.V.N. BHATTI, J.
R. Logeshkumar – Appellant
Vs.
P. Balasubramaniam And Another – Respondent
Civil Appeal Nos. 14621 of 2025 (@ S.L.P.(C) Nos. 4845 of 2025)
Decided On : 05-12-2025
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINT
Grievous injuries suffered in motor accident – There is no restriction on Tribunal in awarding compensation exceeding claimed amount under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Function of Tribunal is to award just compensation which is reasonable based on evidence produced on record.
Grievous injuries suffered in motor accident – There is no restriction on Tribunal in awarding compensation exceeding claimed amount under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Function of Tribunal is to award just compensation which is reasonable based on evidence produced on record.
Subject
Civil Law - Motor Accident Claims
Act Referred
Headnote
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Sections 168 and 173 – Grievous injuries suffered in motor accident – Compensation of Rs.3,98,017/- awarded by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal – Claim for more compensation – There is no restriction on Tribunal in awarding compensation exceeding claimed amount under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Function of Tribunal is to award just compensation which is reasonable based on evidence produced on record – In a given case, discretion to award compensation in excess of amount claimed in petition is based on evidence on record and for reasons recorded for granting just and fair compensation – Appellant claims reimbursement of medical expenses said to have been incurred while undergoing treatment in hospital – Appellant did not bring evidence on amount spent on this behalf before Tribunal – Just and fair compensation amounting to Rs 21,75,681/- awarded. (Paras 11 and 12)
Facts of the case:
Present appeal arises from order dated 20.06.2022 in CMA (MD) No. 3343 of 2014 on file of Madras High Court, filed by Appellant/Claimant for enhancing compensation of Rs.3,98,017/- (Rupees three lakh ninety-eight thousand and seventeen) awarded by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, in Court of III Small Causes, Chennai to Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs).
Findings of Court:
The difference amount payable (from Rs. 21,75,681/-), over and above the amount already paid, will carry an interest of 7.5% from the date of filing the claim petition.
Result : Civil Appeal allowed in part.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. T. Harish Kumar, AOR Mr. Shubham Kothari, Adv. Mrs. Aiyushi Daga, Adv. Mr. Shubham P. Chopra, Adv
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Jagdish Chandra Solanki, Adv. Mr. Vishal Meghwal, AOR
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. T. Harish Kumar, AOR Mr. Shubham Kothari, Adv. Mrs. Aiyushi Daga, Adv. Mr. Shubham P. Chopra, Adv
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Jagdish Chandra Solanki, Adv. Mr. Vishal Meghwal, AOR
Table of Contents
2. Appellant seeks enhancement based on future prospects, attendant allowance, and medical expenses; Insurance Company contends the existing award is just and fair. (Para 9 , 10 )
3. The court evaluated the need for future prospects in income calculation and the necessity of a personal attendant given the claimant's age and severe injuries. (Para 11 )
4. Tribunals may award compensation exceeding the claimed amount to ensure just and fair compensation based on evidence on record. (Para 11 )
5. Appeal allowed in part — compensation enhanced with interest — deficit court fee to be deposited. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 )
6. Can a Tribunal award compensation higher than the amount claimed in the petition?
Yes, there is no restriction on the Tribunal awarding compensation exceeding the claimed amount under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, as its function is to award just and reasonable compensation based on the evidence produced on record. (Para 11 )
7. How is future loss of income handled when calculating compensation for functional disability?
The court may add a percentage of the monthly salary as future prospects to the income used for calculating the loss of earnings due to functional disability to ensure just compensation. (Para 11 , 12 )
8. Under what circumstances can a lump sum for a personal attendant be awarded?
A lump sum for a personal attendant may be awarded by considering the age of the victim and the severity of the injuries that prevent them from living independently. (Para 11 , 12 )
JUDGMENT :
S.V.N. BHATTI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appeal arises from the order dated 20.06.2022 in CMA (MD) No. 3343 of 2014 on the file of the Madras High Court, filed by the Appellant/Claimant for enhancing the compensation of Rs.3,98,017/- (Rupees three lakh ninety-eight thousand and seventeen) awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, in the Court of III Small Causes, Chennai (“the Tribunal”) to Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakh).
3. The Appellant’s case is that on 26.01.2012, he was riding a two-wheeler bearing Registration No. TN 22 AU 0784 from Selaiyur to Medavakkam towards the east. At Kamarajapuram junction, a jeep bearing Registration No. TN 22 BL 7032 came in a rash and negligent manner from the opposite direction without sounding a horn and hit the Appellant’s motorcycle. The incident owned by the first respondent and insured by the second respondent, Insurance Company. The Appellant filed a claim petition, claiming a sum of Rs. 15,00,000 (Rupees fifteen lakh) as compensation in MCOP No. 2672 of 2013 on the file of the Tribunal.
4. The appeal is filed for the enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and for the award of the claimed compensation. Therefore, the averments and the evidence on the admitted position are not adverted to as part of the narrative of the case. At the time of the accident, the Appellant was stated to be 21 years of age and was working as an accounts assistant, earning a monthly salary of Rs. 9,000/- per month. The Claimant examined himself as PW1. The doctors who treated the Appellant, Dr. Kalkura and Dr. Saichandran, were examined as PW2 and PW3, respectively. The Tribunal marked 16 documents on the side of the Appellant. No oral or documentary evidence was placed from the side of the Respondents.
5. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,98,017/- (Rupees three lakh ninety-eight thousand and seventeen) with interest at 7.5% per annum. The Claimant filed CMA (MD) No. 3343 of 2014 seeking enhancement of compensation. The High Court has taken note of the oral evidence of PW2 and PW3, and the extent of disability the first Appellant suffered in the accident. The High Court, through the impugned Judgment, redetermined the compensation. For a quick grasp of the scope of the appeal, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and the High Court is stated as follows:
| Heads | The Tribunal (Rs.) | HC (Rs.) |
| Transport to Hospital | 10,000/- | 10,000/- |
| Extra Nourishment | 15,000/- | 15,000/- |
| Damage to clothing | 1,000/- | 1,000/- |
| Medical Expenses | 60,617/- | 60,617/- |
| Attender Charges | 6,000/- | 6,000/- |
| Loss of Amenities | 5,000/- | 5,000/- |
| Pain and Suffering | 30,000/- | 30,000/- |
| Loss in marital and social status | 10,000/- | 10,000/- |
| Loss of Earnings due to Functional Disability | 2,30,400/- (Rs. 6,000 x 12 x 16 x 20%) | 12,48,000/- (Rs 6500 x 12 x 16 x 100%) |
| Future Medical Expenses | Nil | 80,000/- |
| Total = | Rs.3,98,017/- (7.5%) | Rs.14,65,617/- (7.5%) |
6. The High Court, as part of its consideration of functional disability, held that the Appellant suffered from hemiparesis, disfigurement and brain injuries leading to a 100% loss of earnings due to functional disability. The finding further recorded that the Claimant had not produced any supporting evidence to prove his salary at Rs. 9,000/- per month. The High Court, relying on Syed Sadiq and others v. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, (2014) 2 SCC 735 held that the Claimant cannot be expected to produce documents to prove his monthly income and fixed his monthly income at Rs. 6,500/-. The High Court, thus, enhanced the head – “Loss of Earning due to Functional Disability” – to Rs. 12,48,000/- by increasing his income by Rs. 500/- and considering his Functional Disability as 100%.
7. Hence, the appe
