The assessment of the effect of permanent disability on the earning capacity of the injured and the application of the standard multiplier method to determine loss of dependency are crucial in determining compensation for motor vehicle accident injuries.

JUDGMENT

Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. - Naveen Kumar, the injured victim is in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicle accident dated 15.1.2011 due to rash and negligent driving of Canter Truck bearing registration no. HR-38K-7051.

2. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sirsa vide award dated 18.9.2012 has held the claimant/appellant entitled to a compensation amount of Rs.4,89,000/-. The compensation amount has been computed by the Tribunal as follows:-

3. Counsel for the appellant has contended that the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is grossly inadequate against the backdrop of injuries suffered as also the disability element which had been duly proved on record. It is urged that the compensation awarded under the heads noticed herein above would need to be substantially enhanced besides the appellant being entitled to be awarded compensation under additional heads.

4. Counsel for the contesting insurance company has to the contrary supported the award passed by the Tribunal.

5. It may be stated at the outset that the Tribunal had recorded a specific finding that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the offending/insured vehicle and which had hit the motorcycle being driven by the claimant/appellant and on account of which injuries had been sustained. Insurance company has not challenged such findings of the Tribunal and as such, this aspect has attained finality. Furthermore, the liability to pay the compensation amount was held to be joint and several and as such, it is the respondent-insurance company which would be the contesting party herein.

6. The principles for determination of compensation in the case of permanent/partial disablement have been exhaustively laid down by the Apex Court in Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another , (2011) 2 RCR(Civ) 101. The relevant paragraphs from such judgement are extracted hereunder:-

"6. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following:

Pecuniary damages (Special damages)

(i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalisation, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure.

(ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising:

(a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment;

(b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability.

(iii) Future medical expenses. Non-pecuniary damages (General damages)

(iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries.

(v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage).

(vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity).

In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded only under heads (i), (ii)(a) and (iv). It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant, that compensation will be granted under any of the heads (ii) (b), (iii), (v) and (vi) relating to loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of expectation of life.

7. Assessment of pecuniary damages under Item (i) and under Item (ii)(a) do not pose much difficulty as they involve reimbursement of actuals and are easily ascertainable from the evidence. Award under the head of future medical expenses Item (iii) depends upon specific medical evidence regarding need for further treatment and cost thereo