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

2022 Supreme(Online)(SC) 944

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
KRISHNA MURARI, J
MOHD. SABEER @ SHABIR HUSSAIN – Appellant
Versus
REGIONAL MANAGER, U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION – Respondent
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9070-9071 OF 2022 | Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 481-482 of 2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Not specified
For the Respondents: Not specified

The assessment of compensation for permanent disability must account for the actual impact on the earning capacity beyond mere percentage of disability.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Compensation for permanent disability - Appellant suffered a 70% disability due to an accident caused by the negligence of the bus driver - Initial award of Rs. 15,76,465/- increased by High Court to Rs. 16,70,932/-, later modified to Rs. 38,70,120/- by SC for better reflection of damages including future prospects and maintenance of prosthetics. (Paras 4, 28, 30)

(B) Injury Assessment - The extent of functional disability does not always equate with loss of earning capacity; courts must assess the personal impact on earning potential. (Paras 14, 15)

Facts of the case:
The Appellant, a scrap dealer, suffered a life-altering amputation due to a bus accident; his appeal hinged on the adequacy of compensation awarded.

Findings of Court:
The SC enhanced compensation reflecting the long-term impact of the permanent disability on the Appellant’s life and work prospects.

Issues: The critical issue was how to assess the functional disability and its impact on future earnings.

Ratio Decidendi: Permanent disability's impact must be thoughtfully assessed against the backdrop of realistic earning capacity adjustments and socio-economic realities of the claimant.

Result: Appeals allowed with enhanced compensation.

Table of Content
1. accident details and initial compensation awarded. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
2. arguments regarding the adequacy of disability assessment and compensation. (Para 9 , 10)
3. evaluation of earning capacity affected by permanent disability. (Para 12 , 14 , 15 , 20)
4. court's observation on assessing appropriate compensation. (Para 22 , 28)
5. final compensation awarded and the rationale. (Para 30 , 32)

JUDGEMENT

KRISHNA MURARI, J. Leave granted.

2. The present appeals are directed against the final order dated 12.10.2018 passed by the High Court of Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as “High Court”) in Review Petition No. 391 of 2018 and against the impugned final judgment dated 11.09.2018 passed by the High Court of New Delhi.

3. Briefly, the facts relevant for the purpose of this appeal are as follows:

    I. The Appellant, who is a scrap dealer, was travelling in a bus bearing No. UP-25T-9664 towards his residence in Delhi from his native place at Noor Pur, Gajrola.
    II. The driver of the bus, who is the Respondent No.1 herein was driving in a rash and negligent manner. At around 12:30 am, near the Jindal Pipe Factory in Ghaziabad, the Respondent no.1 driver hit a standing tempo which was parked on the left side of the road.
    III. As a result of this accident, the Appellant and the other passengers in the bus received grave injuries all over their bodies. The Appellant was aged 37 years at the time of the accident and was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. As per the Disability Certificate, the Appellant suffered permanent disability of 70%, his right lower limb amongst other injuries.

4. The Appellant after the accident filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Delhi-II, Dwarka Court, New Delhi claiming a compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- (Twenty Lakhs).

5. The Ld. Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘MACT’) after examining the evidence and issues at hand, held that the Respondent No.1 was the driver of the vehicle, and it was his rash and negligent driving that caused the accident. The Ld. MACT awarded a compensation of Rs.15,76,465/- to the Appellant along with 7.5% interest per annum, the breakup of the same is as follows:

      Cost Of Artificial limb and its MaintenanceRs. 5,70,000/-
      Loss Of Future EarningRs. 6,09,345/-
      Medical ExpensesRs. 57,650/-
      Attendant ChargesRs. 11,802/-
      ConveyanceRs. 10,000/-
      Special DietRs. 15,000/-
      Pain and SufferingRs. 1,00,000/-
      Loss of Amenities of LifeRs. 1,00,000/-
      Loss due to Disability and DisfigurementRs. 1,00,000/-
      TOTALRs. 15,76,465/-
      Cost Of Artificial limb and its MaintenanceRs. 5,70,000/-
      Loss Of Future EarningRs. 6,09,345/-
      Medical ExpensesRs. 57,650/-
      Attendant ChargesRs. 11,802/-
      ConveyanceRs. 10,000/-
      Special DietRs. 15,000/-
      Pain and SufferingRs. 1,00,000/-
      Loss of Amenities of LifeRs. 1,00,000/-
      Loss due to Disability and DisfigurementRs. 1,00,000/-
      TOTALRs. 15,76,465/-

    6. The Appellant then filed MAC App. No. 444/2013 before the High Court of Delhi on grounds that the Ld. MACT did not calculate the loss of earning capacity, future prospects and wrong computation of the Appellant’s disability.

    7. The High Court of Delhi vide judgment dated 11.09.2018 modified the award passed by the Ld. MACT and disposed of the Appeal by enhancing the compensation to Rs.16,70,932/- with 9% interest per annum. The relevant part of the judgment reads as follows:-

      “…Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned Award and the evidence on record, I find that on the aspect of discrepancy in timing of the accident, there is no cross- examination of Injured and so, Insurer cannot be absolved from paying the compensation awarded. It is not the case of Conductor (R2W1) that the Injured was not travelling in the bus in question.
      Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly relied upon the evidence of Injured (PW-4) to hold that the negligence was of the bus driver in causing of the accident in question. The Tribunal has assessed the functional disability of Injured to









                    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6
                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    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