Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
M.S. JAWALKAR, J.
Shirkant @ Srikant Kashinath Gaude – Appellant
Versus
Suryakant Uttam Gaude and Others – Respondents
First Appeal No. 64 of 2009
Decided On : 06-11-2020
Motor Accident - Compensation - Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Right, Full Participation) Act, 1995 - Section 140 of the M.V. Act - Sunil Kumar vs. Inder Sing and Others - Rajkumar vs. Ajaykumar - Vijay Kumar Baburao Modi vs. State of Gujarat - Rupee Manohar vs. Mohd. Ansari and Another - National Insurance Company vs. Pranay Sethys - Jabbar S/o Maliksab Bagwan vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation - Pappudev Yadav vs. Naresh Kumar and Others - Raj Kumar vs. Ajay Kumar - Main Legal Point
Fact of the Case:
The claimant, a helper on a wheel loader, sustained severe injuries in a motor vehicle accident and claimed compensation for permanent disability, loss of earnings, future treatment, and impotency. The Claims Tribunal awarded him Rs. 1,18,100/- with interest. The claimant appealed for enhancement of compensation to Rs. 6,00,000/- due to impotency and permanent disability.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the claimant was entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 2,78,930/-, including amounts for loss of earnings, medical bills, pain and sufferings, impotency, loss of matrimonial prospects, and loss of amenities. The judgment and award of the Claims Tribunal were modified accordingly.
Issues: The issues involved the assessment of compensation for permanent disability, impotency, loss of earnings, future treatment, and loss of amenities.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered medical evidence, legal precedents, and the impact of the injuries on the claimant's life to determine the just and fair compensation. It acknowledged the absence of scales for assessing impotency and the need to compensate for loss of amenities and future treatment.
Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, and the total compensation awarded to the claimant was modified to Rs. 2,78,930/-, to be paid jointly and severally by the respondents with future interest at the rate of 9%.
The legal document discusses the assessment of just and fair compensation in a motor accident case involving permanent disability, impotency, loss of earnings, and loss of amenities. The core legal principles include the importance of evaluating medical evidence, the impact of injuries on the claimant's life, and the need for equitable compensation that adequately restores the claimant to the position prior to the accident.
Key points include: - The court's authority to determine compensation based on the nature and consequences of injuries, even in the absence of specific scales for assessing certain disabilities such as impotency (!) (!) . - The recognition that permanent disabilities, including loss of sexual function, can be compensated considering their effect on the claimant's life, future prospects, and amenities, despite the lack of precise measurement scales (!) (!) . - The importance of considering both pecuniary damages (like loss of earnings and medical expenses) and non-pecuniary damages (such as pain, suffering, and loss of amenities) to arrive at a fair compensation amount (!) (!) . - The principle that the award should be just, reasonable, and based on the factual circumstances of each case, aiming to fully compensate the claimant for the loss suffered (!) (!) . - The court's discretion to award compensation exceeding the claimed amount if the evidence justifies it, emphasizing the welfare-oriented purpose of the Motor Vehicles Act (!) .
Overall, the judgment underscores the importance of a holistic and equitable approach in awarding compensation for injuries resulting from motor vehicle accidents, considering both tangible and intangible losses, and the necessity of fair valuation even for disabilities that are difficult to quantify precisely.
JUDGMENT :
M.S. JAWALKAR, J.
1. Heard Mr. V.G.P. Dukle, learned Advocate for the Appellant and Mr. Amey Kakodkar, learned Advocate for the Respondents.
2. The present appeal is filed being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 3rd and 4th April, 2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Margao, in Claim Petition No. 43 of 2006.
3. The case of the claimants before Claims Tribunal was as under:
4. It appears that the learned Tribunal while giving facts in the Claim Petition referred to un-amended claim petition. From record it appears that the claimant amended the petition in respect of occurrence of accident as well as amount of compensation. In the amended petition, it is case of the petitioner that when he was proceeding on his motor bike (number not given) respondent no. 1, the driver of the truck bearing registration no. GA-01-U-7975 while overtaking came to extreme side of the road. The applicant managed himself to get saved from putting his motor cycle in the road side gutter. Thereafter he saw the said truck stopped at the middle of the road on the speed breaker, he stopped his motor cycle to the side of the road to ask the driver of the truck why he was driving so rash. He came to the driver's side of the truck and while he was asking suddenly driver of the truck started the truck and gave dash to the applicant and ran away. In this process the rear tyre of the truck went over the body of the applicant i.e. part of left leg.
5. The learned Claims Tribunal framed issues and after considering the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the claimant was entitled to the compensation of Rs. 1,18,100/- with further interest @ 9% per annum from the date of Claim Petition until full payment and respondents no. 2 and 3 were ordered to pay jointly and severally to the claimant.
6. The appeal is preferred for enhancement of compensation. It is a matter of record that earlier the claimant claimed amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- towards compensation, however, by way of an amendment it is enhanced to Rs. 6,00,000/-.
7. It is the contention of the claimant that at the time of the accident his age was 23 years. Due to accident his prospects of marriage have come to an end and the appellant is compelled to live the life of impotent person thereby having physical, biological and mental degradation in his life. The present appeal is filed on the ground that the compensation awarded is not fair and just. The learned Claim's Tribunal failed to consider that the claimant has completely lost entire sexual powers and have became completely impotent. Though the claimant claimed an amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- the Court/Tribunal should award just and fair compensation. It the co
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
