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

2009 Supreme(Raj) 2508

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Mahesh Bhagwati, J.
Prakash Chandra Dabrani - Appellant
Versus
Laxman Singh and Anr. - Respondent
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1001 of 2001.
Decided On : 26-11-2009

Advocates:
For the Appellant: K.N. Tiwari, Counsel.
For the Respondents: Kishan Swami, Counsel.

In cases of motor vehicle accidents resulting in permanent disability and loss of income, the court may apply the structured formula to determine the appropriate amount of compensation, taking into account the victim's injuries, disability, pain and suffering, and future economic loss.

Headnote:

MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT - COMPENSATION - ENHANCEMENT - MACT AWARD - AMPUTATION OF LEG - PERMANENT DISABILITY - LOSS OF INCOME - PHYSICAL AND MENTAL SUFFERING - APPLICATION OF STRUCTURED FORMULA - ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, a labourer, suffered amputation of his right leg below the knee in a road accident caused by the negligent driving of a roadways bus. He filed a claim petition before the MACT, which awarded him compensation of Rs. 3,45,100/-. Dissatisfied with the amount, the appellant filed an appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant had suffered 40% permanent disability as a result of the accident, which had led to a reduction in his monthly income and efficiency of working, as well as increased physical and mental suffering. The court also noted that the appellant would have to use an artificial limb, which would incur huge expenses and lead to lifelong suffering.

Issues: 1. Whether the compensation awarded by the MACT was adequate in light of the appellant's injuries and disability? 2. Whether the appellant was entitled to additional compensation for pain, suffering, and future economic loss?

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the compensation awarded by the MACT was inadequate and needed to be enhanced. The court applied the structured formula to determine the appropriate amount of compensation, taking into account the appellant's permanent disability, physical pain and suffering, and future economic loss. The court also considered the fact that the appellant would have to use an artificial limb, which would incur additional expenses and cause lifelong suffering.

Final Decision: The court enhanced the compensation awarded by the MACT from Rs. 3,45,100/- to Rs. 4,40,100/-. The court also directed that the enhanced amount be deposited with the Tribunal and kept in fixed deposit for a period of five years in the name of the appellant.

JUDGMENT

1. - Being aggrieved with the amount of compensation under the impugned award dated 11th April, 2001 rendered by the MACT, Jaipur, the Appellant has preferred this appeal for the enhancement thereof.

2. Contextual facts depict that on 4th May, 1996 at about 8.45 p.m., the Appellant claimant Prakash Chandra Dabrani was going by roadways bus bearing registration No. RNP 469 from Panch Batti to Saragogi Mansion at Jaipur. At Saragogi Mansion, the driver stopped the bus. It is alleged that only 2 or 3 passengers had alighted from the bus and when the Appellant was in the process of alighting, the driver of the bus without getting any signal from the conductor, suddenly accelerated it, as a result of which the Appellant fell on the road and the wheel of the bus ran over his leg resulting ultimately into its amputation. The Appellant suffered 40% permanent disability. This disability has led into reduction of his monthly income and efficiency of working to a great extent and caused a increases in physical and mental sufferance. The Appellant filed a claim petition before the Tribunal and the learned Tribunal has decreed an amount of Rs. 3,45,100/- in his favour and against the non claimant-Respondents. The Appellant was not satisfied with this amount of compensation. Hence, this appeal.

3. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record.

4. The learned Counsel for the Appellant took me through the statement of the Appellant Prakash Chandra and medical board's certificate and canvassed that on account of negligent driving of bus driver, the Appellant lost his right leg permanently resulting into his life to be pitiable. He further canvassed that the Appellant is a labourer and he was earning Rs. 90/- to 225/- per day for his livelihood. He was doing the work of loading and unloading the vehicles, for which his body sturdy legs and sturdy hands were required. On account of amputation of his leg, he has been made incapacitated and left in the lurch. The learned Tribunal despite there being so much of evidence on record in this regard, lost sight of this factor that the victim would have to use artificial limb, which would incur not only huge expenses but lead to life long suffering and unseemingly awarded a very meagre amount of Rs. 40,000/- towards 40% permanent disability and only Rs. 40,000/- for his physical pain and suffering.

5. In the case of Swatantra Kumar v. Qamir Ali and Ors., reported in 1999 (1) TAC 413 , the Hon'ble Apex Court awarded Rs. 4,00,000/-compensation in a case wherein the shortening of leg was found to be 3 inches. In the instant case, right leg below knee has been amputated. Hence, an additional amount of compensation should be awarded and the impugned award be modified.

6. The learned Counsel for the Respondent-Insurance Company, in contra, has defended the impugned award and called the same to be just and proper. He further canvassed that a reasonable amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,45,100/- has been awarded in favour of the Appellant and the same needs no intervention.

7. Having ruminated over the submissions made at the bar and carefully scanned the relevant material including the impugned award, it is noticed that the Appellant is a poor labourer and has been earning his livelihood out of loading and unloading the vehicles. Undeniably and irrefutably for a labourer loading the truck with bags of grains or unloading the same, the stout and strong legs and hands are required. In the absence of either of these, this act cannot be performed. The Appellant, who had be doing the above work for the last so many years, now shall have to switch over to another job as he has lost one leg in the accident. He has been incapacitated for his whole life. Social scar of having amputated leg will also have to be born till he survives. Albeit the inefficiency, incapacity or in-sufficiency cannot be compensated in terms of money, yet the money plays an important role in









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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