SC enhances Motor Vehicle accident compensation awarded by MP High Court; Says percentage of disability reduced on surmises & conjectures

Supreme Court: In a special leave petition filed against the order passed by Madhya Pradesh High Court, wherein the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (‘Tribunal’) has been enhanced to Rs.1,27,700/- from Rs.87,700/ with same interest contending inter-alia that compensation so awarded by the High Court is on the lower side and same has to be enhanced, the division bench of Sanjay Karol and Aravind Kumar, JJ. has substituted the award of Rs.1,27,700/- as given by the High Court, to Rs.2,42,120/-, comprising of loss of future income due to permanent disability, Medical expenses, attendant charges, pain and suffering, and transportation.

Further, the Bench directed the Insurance Company to pay the balance amount of compensation with interest at 7% per annum as awarded by the Tribunal by depositing the same before the jurisdictional Tribunal within 6 weeks from the date of this order.

Issue:

Whether the appellant/claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation as urged? And if so, to what amount?

Analysis:

After perusing the award passed by the Tribunal, the Court noted that the claimant had sustained compound fracture in the left acetabulum and left rib. The Court also noted that as per the Doctor who had examined the claimant had deposed that whole body disability suffered by the claimant was to the extent of 17% and this fact has been elicited in the cross-examination.

Further, the Court said that the Tribunal computed the compensation towards loss of future income by considering the whole-body disability at 10%. The Bench also remarked that on surmises and conjectures the percentage of disability has been reduced, without any reason.

The Court after referring to various cases on when the medical evidence tendered by the claimant is perused, viewed that Tribunal and the High Court committed a serious error in not accepting the said medical evidence and in the absence of any contra evidence available on record, neither the Tribunal nor the High Court could have substituted the disability to 10% as against the opinion of the doctor certified at 17%. Thus, the compensation awarded under the head ‘loss of income’ towards permanent disability deserves to be enhanced by construing the whole-body disability at 17%.

The Court said that the monthly income of the claimant has been construed as Rs.3,500/- which is on the lower side particularly as the accident has occurred in 2013 and as he was self-employed as a mechanic and had work experience of over 30 years. Thus, his income has to be construed at Rs.6,500/- per month in substitution to Rs.3,500/- computed by the Tribunal and the High Court. Thus, the Court held that the claimant/appellant would be entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.92,820/- (Rs.6,500 X 12 X 7 X 17%) towards loss of future income.

Moreover, the Court viewed that compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the heads of Attendant charges, pain and suffering, transportation together in a sum of Rs.9,000, which is abysmally on the lower side and same deserves to be enhanced. Thus, the Bench enhanced the lump sum compensation to Rs.1,00,000/- to be awarded under these three heads.

Thus, the Court enhanced the award of Rs.1,27,700/- as given by the High Court, to Rs.2,42,120/-, comprising of loss of future income due to permanent disability, Medical expenses, Attendant charges, pain and suffering, and transportation.