IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, J.
Miss Twinkle, D/o. Sh. Jameet Lal, through her mother Smt. Raj Kumari, W/o. Sh. Jameet Lal – Petitioner
Versus
Kulbir Singh Manhas alias Gulla, S/o. Shri Kamal Singh and Ors. – Respondents
MA No. 275 Of 2010
Decided On : 04-10-2023
Compensation - Motor Accident Claims - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 168 - Just compensation to be determined based on fairness, reasonableness, and equitability - Courts have emphasized the endeavor to award just and fair compensation in motor accident claims - Factors to be considered include pain, suffering, loss of income, loss of amenities, medical expenses, and loss of marriage prospects - Tribunal erred in awarding lower compensation and not considering marriage prospects - Award amount enhanced by the court.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving, resulting in serious injuries. The appellant filed a claim petition seeking compensation, which was awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The appellant appealed for enhancement of the award amount, citing various grounds including becoming a crippled person, hospitalization, and loss of marriage prospects.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the tribunal erred in calculating the compensation and not considering the diminished marriage prospects of the appellant. It deemed it proper to enhance the award amount to adequately compensate the appellant for the injuries and loss of marriage prospects.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant-claimant had made out a case for further enhancement of the amount of compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need to award just and fair compensation in motor accident claims, considering factors such as pain, suffering, loss of income, loss of amenities, medical expenses, and loss of marriage prospects. It held that the tribunal erred in awarding lower compensation and not considering marriage prospects, and therefore enhanced the award amount.
Final Decision: The court enhanced the award amount to adequately compensate the appellant for the injuries and loss of marriage prospects, and directed the appellant to be entitled to the enhanced sum with interest.
JUDGMENT :
1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant against award dated 29.01.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jammu (Court below, for short) in file No. 548/Claim titled Twinkle v/s Kulbir Singh Manhas and others.
BRIEF FACTS.
2. The appellant met with an accident on 4 April 2004 due to rash and negligent driving of respondent 1 who was driving the vehicle (Tata Mobile) bearing No.JK02S-8863 and hit appellant outside her house, situated at village Pandorian, Tehsil and District Jammu. Due to the accident, the appellant suffered serious injury over left foot with exposure of underlying muscles, tendons and bones, with crushing of lateral malleolus left. The external fixation with support of rods was given to the appellant and an operation with bone grafting was done. The appellant has scarring of dorsolateral aspect of left ankle with wasting of left foot with stiffness of left ankle, hence making appellant unable to walk properly.
3. The appellant filed a claim petition bearing No. 548 on 27.10.2004 and claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 30 lacs, along with interest. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jammu after consideration of the matter vide order dated 29.01.2010 passed an award of Rs.1,09,250.00 along with 7.5% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition in favour of the petitioner (appellant herein).
4. It is further submitted by the appellant that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and hence prays for the enhancement of award amount on the following grounds:
b. The appellant has also been hospitalized for a long time and has spent huge amount of money on her treatment, travelling, medicines, special diet etc.
c. The appellant has not been granted any compensation for gracious service rendered by her family members.
d. The appellant cannot run, squat or walk and has lost all amenities of life. She also suffered lot of pain and suffering.
e. The Tribunal awarded a meager amount of Rs 29,250/- on account of loss of future income, which is minimal and incorrect. The amount awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side.
f. The interest on loss of future is wrongly declined by the Tribunal. Hence the appellant prays for the enhancement to the tune of Rs 30.00 lac along with interest as stated in the claim petition.
QUESTION OF LAW
5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for Appellant/claimant and having gone through the material facts on record, the only question that falls for this court’s consideration is whether the appellant-claimant has made out any case for further enhancement of the amount of compensation.
LEGAL ANALYSIS
Compensation To Be Just And Fair
6. While it is very difficult to make an accurate assessment of the compensation to be awarded to the motor accident victim as the loss is not confined to the pecuniary value, however, the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has provided a protection to the victim against an inadequate compensation. For reference, the Section 168 of the Act is reproduced as under:
“(1)On receipt of an application for compensation made under section 166, the Claims Tribunal shall, after giving notice of the application to the insurer and after giving the parties (including the insurer) an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry into the claim or, as the case may be, each of the claims and, subject to the provisions of section 162 may make an award determining the amount of compensation which appears to it to be just and specifying the person or persons to whom compensation shall be paid and in making the award the Claims Tribunal s
Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr (2009) 6 SCC 121
Nagappa vs. Gurdayal Singh and others (2003) 2 SCC 274
State of Haryana vs. Jasbir Kaur (2003) 7 S.C.C. 484
Yadava Kumar Vs. Divisional Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2010) 10 SCC 341
Jagdish vs Mohan and others reported in (2018) 4 SCC 571
R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others
Govind Yadav v. New India Insurance Company Limited
Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Company Limited and Another
Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar and Another
K. Suresh v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. reported in (2012) 12 SCC 274
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to award just and fair compensation in motor accident claims, considering various factors such as pain, suffering, loss of income, loss of....
A minor child suffering permanent disability in a motor accident must not be treated as a non-earning individual; compensation for loss of income should be calculated using minimum wages for skilled ....
A minor child suffering permanent disability in a motor vehicle accident is entitled to receive compensation based on the minimum wages of a skilled worker, including future prospects and a proper mu....
A person who has suffered permanent disability in a motor vehicle accident is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future prospects, and the calculation of such compensation should cons....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.