Motor Accident Claims: Bombay High Court Reiterates Heads Under Which Compensation Can Be Awarded In "Personal Injury" Cases
The Bombay High court in a recent judgment considered the fairness of the quantum of compensation granted to a motor accident victim. The victim had suffered severe bodily injuries and multiple fractures at the age of 24 and had to undergo various treatments regularly. Single Bench of Justice Bharati Dangre accessed the various heads under which compensation can be granted. It referred...
The Bombay High court in a recent judgment considered the fairness of the quantum of compensation granted to a motor accident victim. The victim had suffered severe bodily injuries and multiple fractures at the age of 24 and had to undergo various treatments regularly.
Single Bench of Justice Bharati Dangre accessed the various heads under which compensation can be granted. It referred to the Apex court decision of Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar 2011(1) SCC 343, wherein the Court has succinctly set out the various heads for awarding compensation in cases of disability incurred due to a motor accident.
The general principles relating to compensation in injury cases under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 make it clear that the award must be just, which means that compensation should, to the extent possible, "fully and adequately restore" the claimant to the position prior to the accident.
"The object of awarding damages is to make good the loss suffered as a result of wrong done as far as money can do so, in a fair, reasonable, and equitable manner. The court or tribunal shall have to assess the damages objectively and exclude from consideration any speculation or fancy, though some conjecture with reference to the nature of disability and its consequences, is inevitable. A person is not only to be compensated for the physical injury, but also for the loss which he suffered as a result of such injury. This means that he is to be compensated for his inability to lead a full life, his inability to enjoy those normal amenities which he would have enjoyed but for the injuries, and his inability to earn as much as he used to earn or could have earned."
The court reiterated that the heads under which the compensation can be awarded in personal injury cases are:
Pecuniary damages (Special Damages)
- (i). Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, 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 disability. Account permanent
- (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).
It recorded that in routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded only under Head i, ii(a) and iv, but in serious cases of injury where there is specific medical evidence, corroboration the evidence of the claimant, that compensation will be granted under 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.
In the instant case the court increased the quantum of the compensation awarded by the tribunal to include compensation on account of the claimant's age, income, future prospects, and also for loss of expectation of life.
"When a claimant suffers a disability as a result of such injuries and on ascertaining that the disability is of permanent nature, the assessment of compensation under the head of 'loss of future earnings, would depend upon the effect and impact of such permanent disability on his earning capacity. It is expected that the mechanical formulae of calculating the loss of earning capacity depending upon the percentage of permanent disability, is not to be applied as in most of the cases, the percentage of economic loss i.e. the percentage of loss of earning capacity, arising from a permanent disability will be different from the percentage of permanent disability," the Court said.
Case Title : Manager, National Insurance Co.Ltd v Shri Nilesh Suresh Bhandari and ors
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 126