Effective and fair assessment of compensation must consider the claimant's actual earnings, with flexibility allowed for individual circumstances, particularly in cases of permanent disability.

J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the award in O.P.(M.V.) No.1371 of 2005 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha by the injured. Appellant sustained injuries in a motor accident on 26.05.2005 and the learned tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.1,09,810/- (Rupees One Lakh Nine Thousand Eight Hundred and Ten only) with 8.5% interest as compensation. Being aggrieved by that, the injured preferred this appeal.

2. Claimant's case in the lower court was that on 26.05.2005, while he was riding a motorcycle KL-7AA-4064 from Pathirippala to Mangurassy, another vehicle KL-9/N-8046 driven in a rash and negligent manner hit against his vehicle, as a result, he sustained serious injuries in the accident. The accident was not disputed by the respondents in the lower court. The driver and owner of the vehicle were ex parte and the insurer admitted the insurance of the vehicle. Claimant examined PW1 and his documents were marked as Exts.A1 to A8. Respondents evidence was marked as Ext.B1.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the injured is an Engineer and a Contractor for the Cable works of BSNL, Palakkad and was getting an amount of Rs.20,000/- per month, but while awarding compensation, the learned Tribunal took only Rs.2,500/- as his monthly income. It is also contended that the Court below did not allow the marking of Engineering Degree Certificate and Contractor Certificate for cable construction work in BSNL and Income Tax Returns. Moreover, the appellant sustained

13% disability in the accident.

4. In permanent injury case, the injured is entitled to get higher income than that in death case. The damages are to be assessed separately as pecuniary and special damages. The object is to compensate injury so far as money can compensate. When compensation is to be awarded for pain, suffering and loss of amenities in life, special circumstances of the claimant have to be taken into account. Amount of compensation for non- pecuniary loss is not easy to determine, but award must reflect that different circumstances have been taken into consideration. Hence, the multiplier method has to be followed to calculate pecuniary loss upon annual basis. In Yadava Kumar v. D.M. National Insurance Co. Ltd. [ 2010 (8) SCALE 567 ] Apex Court reiterated the principle in relation to the assessment of damages for personal injuries cases as follows:

“ We do not intend to review in detail state of authorities in relation to assessment of all damages for personal injury. Suffice it to say that the basis of assessment of all damages for personal injury is compensation. The whole idea is to put the claimant in the same position as he was insofar as money can. Perfect compensation is hardly possible but one has to keep in mind that the victim has done no wrong; he has suffered at the hands of the wrongdoer and the court must take care to give him full and fair compensation for that he had suffered.

10. In some cases for personal injury, the claim could be in respect of lifetime's earning lost because, though he will live, he cannot earn his living. In others, the claim may be made for partial loss of earnings. Each case has to be considered in the light of its own facts and at the end, one must ask whether the sum awarded is a fair and reasonable sum. The conventional basis of assessing compensation in personal injury cases, and that is now recognised mode as to the proper measure of compensation-is taking an appropriate multiplier of an appropriate multiplicand.”

5. The assessment of compensation in permanent disability cases would differ from person to person according to the nature of injury. Vast discretion is vested with the court for assessment of just compensation in injury cases. There can be no uniform standard and yardstick provided for assessing such compensation. When two persons sustain similar injury, that can attract the same compensation, but the heads under which, compensation can be attributed are truly