Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RAJESH BINDAL, ATUL S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.
Ahsan – Appellant
Versus
Shambhu Lal Vaishnav and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1702 of 2026 [SLP (C) No. 19981 of 2025]
Decided On : 17-02-2026
Key Points: - The appellant sought compensation for head injury resulting in 100% disability; tribunal awarded Rs.4,56,340; High Court enhanced to Rs.8,45,120; Supreme Court ultimately awarded Rs.23,69,996 and detailed adjustments (income, future medical expenses, attendant charges, pain & suffering, loss of amenities) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - Notional income accepted as Rs.2,400 per month (minimum wage for skilled labour in 2005); appellant claimed Rs.6,000/month, which was rejected; multiplier applied as 16 based on age 35 (per discharge ticket) (!) (!) - Future medical expenses set at Rs.7,00,000; attendant charges calculated at Rs.6,72,000 (Rs.3,500/month x 12 x 16) (!) (!) (!) - Enhanced compensation total Rs.23,69,996 with interest at 6% per annum from date of filing till realization; paid within 12 weeks to appellant’s bank account if available (!) (!)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case and compensation awarded. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties regarding compensation. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's analysis and reasoning on compensation assessment. (Para 8) |
| 4. final decision on enhanced compensation amount. (Para 9) |
ORDER :
ATUL S. CHANDURKAR, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant is aggrieved by the partial enhancement in the amount of compensation granted to him vide judgment dated 05.05.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court1 [For short, the High Court] in S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1424 of 2008.
3. On 15.11.2005, when the appellant was travelling on his scooter, the first respondent gave him a dash with the car that was alleged to have been driven rashly and negligently by him. The said car was owned by the second respondent and insured with the third respondent. As a result of the said accident, the appellant suffered head injury which resulted in paralysing his body. The appellant approached the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal2 [For short ‘the Claims Tribunal’] seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.20,54,000/-from the driver of the vehicle, its owner and the insurance company under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.3 [For short, the Act]
4. In support of his claim, the appellant examined three witnesses and produced various documents. The respondents did not adduce any evidence whatsoever. Vide award dated 04.10.2007, the Claims Tribunal awarded compensation in the following manner:
| Head of Compensation | Granted by Tribunal |
| Permanent Disability | Rs.3,82,464/- (16 x 2400 x 12 x 83/100) |
| Simple injuries | Rs.7,000/- |
| One grievous injury | Rs.5,000/- |
| Transportation, diet and other relevant expenses during treatment | Rs.9,000/- |
| Reimbursement of medical expenses | Rs.52,876/- |
| Total | Rs.4,56,340/- |
5. The appellant, not being satisfied with the award of compensation of Rs.4,56,340/- by the Claims Tribunal, preferred appeal under Section 173 of the Act. The High Court, after reappreciating the evidence on record, was pleased to enhance the amount of compensation by Rs.3,88,780/- in the following manner:
| Head of Compensation | Granted by High Court |
| Annual income (100% disability) | Rs.2400/- x 12 x 16 = Rs.4,60,800/- |
| Future prospects (+) 40% | Rs.1,84,320/- |
| Pain & Suffering/Special Diet (+) | Rs.1,00,000/- |
| Attendant Charges/Future Treatment (+) | Rs.1,00,000/- |
| Total | Rs.8,45,120/- |
| Already Awarded Amount (-) | Rs.4,56,340/- |
| Enhanced amount of compensation | Rs.3,88,780/- |
5.1. Not being satisfied with the partial enhancement in the amount of compensation, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.
6. Mr. Arjun Garg, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the annual income of the appellant has been assessed on the lower side notwithstanding the fact that the appellant was earning an amount of Rs.6,000/- per month. He submitted that the appellant having suffered 100% disability, the said aspect was required to be borne in mind while awarding just compensation. Even the age of the appellant was taken on a higher side as 35 years despite the fact that the appellant was aged about 26 years when the accident took place. Similarly, under other heads such as pain and suffering, attendant charges as well as loss of income, lesser amounts had been awarded. It was, thus, submitted that the appellant having claimed fair amount of compensation in his claim petition, that amount ought to be awarded to him.
7. On the other hand, Mr. Aditya Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the insurance company supported the impugned judgment. According to him, the High Court determined fair amount of compensation on the basis of evidence led by the appellant. There is no scope for any further enhancement in the amount of
The court ruled that the compensation for personal injuries must adequately reflect the nature of the injuries, with adjustments for future medical expenses and functional disability considered essen....
Injury in motor accident – Notional income would have to be determined on the basis of minimum wages admissible for a skilled workman.
In cases of total permanent disability involving a minor, compensation must be calculated using minimum wage rates for skilled and semi-skilled labor, incorporating future prospects and the necessity....
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 – Amount of compensation claimed is not a bar for Tribunal and High Court to award more than what is claimed – Rough calculation made by claimant is not a bar or upper limit.
The court recalibrated compensation due to incorrect disability assessment, setting it at 30%, and provided enhanced total compensation of Rs.22,56,500 with 7.5% interest.
Court emphasized the need for compensation to reflect permanent disability and loss of earning capacity, enhancing the award to ensure justice.
The court affirmed that in cases of permanent disability resulting from motor accidents, claimants are entitled to compensation that includes future loss of income and prospects, ensuring that the aw....
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
