Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
MRS. BHARATI DANGRE, J
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Yunus Abdul Rahman Mansoori – Respondent
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.263 OF 2022 | FIRST APPEAL NO.520 OF 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Nitesh Bhutekar, Mr. Sunil S. Bhide
For the Respondents: Mr. Sunil S. Bhide, Mr. Nitesh Bhutekar
Compensation for personal injury requires adherence to established legal standards, including the application of the multiplier method for assessing future earnings loss.
Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166 - Appeals regarding compensation following motor accident - Appellant's challenge to the tribunal's award of Rs.6,01,248/- with interest at 7.5% - Claimant asserts inadequacy; Tribunal found negligence by bus driver, emphasized need for just compensation. (Paras 1, 5, 28, 46)
(B) Assessing compensation - Failure to apply multiplier method for permanent disability - Court emphasized the necessity of objectively assessing damages consistent with established principles of compensation for personal injury. (Paras 43, 46)
Facts of the case:
The claimant sustained severe injuries due to a collision with a bus, asserting negligence on the part of the driver, which resulted in significant physical impairment and income loss. (Paras 5, 11)
Findings of Court:
The tribunal awarded Rs.6,01,248/- but failed to apply a multiplier method in compensation assessment for long-term disability; compensation was inadequate. (Paras 1, 46)
Issues: Whether the tribunal should have considered the concept of contributory negligence regarding the accident; adequacy of compensation awarded for permanent disability. (Paras 16, 43)
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that claims for personal injury compensation must adequately reflect future earnings loss using a multiplier method and that the Tribunal erred by not utilizing it, reaffirming established legal standards for fairness in compensation. (Paras 43, 46)
Result: Appeals partly allowed with modified compensation amounting to Rs.12,67,648/- with 9% annual interest.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of claims and background. (Para 1 , 2 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. determination of negligence and injuries. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 3. arguments regarding compensation. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. analysis of witness testimony. (Para 19 , 20 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. application of multiplier method for compensation. (Para 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 6. final order and conclusion. (Para 47 , 48) |
ORDER :-
1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 01/07/2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mumbai in M.A.C.P. Application No.619 of 2014, directing the appellant to pay compensation of Rs.6,01,248/- along with interest thereon at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till realization to the claimant, who sustained an injury in an accident caused by the vehicle belonging to the appellant, First Appeal No.263 of 2022 is instituted by the MSRTC.
2. First Appeal No.520 of 2021 is instituted by the claimant being aggrieved by the very same judgment delivered by the Tribunal, being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded and claiming that though he was able to establish before the Tribunal that the accident occurred on account of gross negligence of the driver belonging to the MSRTC and the accident left him disabled and doomed his career as a labour contractor, the compensation awarded is highly inadequate. The appellant in the said appeal, therefore, claim compensation to the extent of Rs.32,24,558/- along with interest on the said amount.
3. Since both the first appeals impugn the very same judgment, they are clubbed together and respective counsel are permitted to advance arguments, common to the respective stand.
I have heard learned counsel Mr. Sunil Bhide appearing of the appellant in First Appeal No.520 of 2021, who represents the respondent-claimant in First Appeal No.263 of 2022. Mr. Nitesh Bhutekar represents the MSRTC and argued on behalf of the appellant in First Appeal No.263 of 2022 and for respondent in First Appeal No.520 of 2021.
4. Since both the parties have placed on record a compilation of documents, comprising of the evidence led before the Tribunal and also the necessary documents, including the FIR and other papers, the appeals are taken up for final hearing and are decided by this common judgment.
5. The claimant before the MACT, Mumbai, is one Mr. Mohd. Yunus Abdul Rahman Mansoori, aged 42 years. He filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (MACT Application No.619 of 2014), claiming compensation of Rs.10 lakhs for various losses suffered by him in the accident, which took place on 05/01/2014. It was pleaded by him that on the fateful day, the applicant was riding on his motorcycle bearing No.MH-04-CN-8443 at about 6.45 hours and was proceeding from Ekta Chowk to Talawali Naka Chowk Road and when he reached opposite Katai Shiv Sena Office, besides Prakash Hotel, Bhiwandi, the offending bus bearing No.MH-12- CH-7930, being driven in excessive speed and in rash and negligent manner, rammed into his motorcycle from behind. The impact of the collision was so severe that the applicant fell down on the road and was dragged several feet away. He came to be admitted to Shiraj Hospital for preliminary treatment but shifted to Good Nursing Home, Bhiwandi on the very same day and subsequently, admitted in Upadhyay Nursing Home on 16/01/2014 and was discharged on 03/02/2014. He alleged that the accident took place on account of the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending bus and the accident resulted into degloving injury on the left knee region coupled with open grade – III fracture (L) poximal fibula neck fracture (undisplaced) and other multiple serious injuries as per the medical papers. Alleging that the gross negligence and rash driving on the part of the vehicle driver was the cause for his injuries, which resulted in unbearable pain and suffering to him and also disrupted his normal functions of life, as he was advised to take complete rest, causing loss of
