MV Act | Supreme Court Enhances Compensation Of Victim With 75% Disability, Awards Compensation For Loss Of Marriage Prospects

The Supreme Court has awarded enhanced compensation of Rs. 15.9 Lakhs from the previous amount of Rs. 2.3 Lakhs, to a motor vehicle accident victim, who sustained 75% whole body injury. The Bench has additionally granted compensation towards ‘loss of marriage prospects’ since the Claimant remained unmarried due to disability.

The Bench comprising of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Aravind Kumar, while adjudicating an appeal filed in Sri Lakshmana Gowda B.N. v The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Co. Ltd. and Another, has observed that inability of the Claimant to work due to the disability cannot be denied on the ground that his Employer was not examined or no letter was produced from the Employer. The evidence of disability such as disability certificate and identity card issued by Directorate for the Empowerment of Differently Abled and Senior Citizens, cannot be brushed aside by the Tribunal and High Court.

BACKGROUND FACTS

In 2007, Sri Lakshmana Gowda B.N. (“Appellant/Claimant”) met with a road accident and sustained injuries. The offending vehicle was insured by The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Co. Ltd. (“Respondent No. 1/Insurer”). The Claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act, seeking award of compensation. The Claimant had stated on oath that he is 24 years old, a graduate and was employed as a Marketing Executive with Rs. 8,000/- per month salary. The accident caused 48% permanent physical disability and 75% disability to the Claimant’s body.

The Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal (“Tribunal”) construed the Claimant’s income to be Rs. 3,000/- and awarded total compensation of Rs. 2,36,812/- alongwith interest @8% p.a. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 50,000/- towards pain, injuries and suffering; Rs. 1,16,812/- towards medical and incidental expenses; Rs. 10,000/- towards Loss of earning during laid up period; Rs. 40,000/- towards Permanent Disability; and Rs. 20,000/- towards loss of amenities in future life.

The Claimant challenged the Award before the High Court seeking enhancement of compensation. On 07.01.2019, the High Court affirmed the compensation amount but reduced the interest to 6% p.a.

The Claimant filed an appeal before the Supreme Court challenging the quantum of the compensation.

SUPREME COURT VERDICT

The Bench enhanced the compensation towards ‘Pain and Suffering’ to additional Rs. 50,000/-, while observing that the Claimant was hospitalized for ten days and was in continuous treatment thereafter.

The Bench noted that the Claimant had produced salary certificate in support of his income of Rs. 8,000/- per month and deposed on oath that he is unable to discharge his normal duties. Merely because the Employer was not examined nor any letter was produced from the Employer, it cannot be said that Claimant did not suffer any bodily injury. The evidence of disability such as disability certificate and identity card issued by Directorate for the Empowerment of Differently Abled and Senior Citizens cannot be brushed aside.

Compensation on the aspect of salary to be revised as per the amount mentioned in salary certificate

As regards the salary aspect of Claimant, the Bench held that the compensation requires re-computation in view of the monthly salary mentioned as Rs. 8,000/- in the salary certificate. The High Court and the Tribunal could not have ignored the salary stated by Claimant on hyper technical grounds.

“Claimant has deposed that he was working as Marketing Executive in a private company called M/s Golden Investments and drawing a salary of Rs.8,000/- p.m. as per salary certificate Ex.P-6. No doubt claimant did not examine his employer. On this ground, it cannot be gain said by the Insurer that claimant was unable to earn or was not earning Rs.8,000/- p.m. The accident in question had occurred in the year 2007. Even a mason at that point of time was earning not less than Rs.300/- per day or in other words Rs.9,000/- p.m. during 2007. Claimant being a graduate and working as Marketing Executive, his plea of salary being Rs.8,000/- p.m. deserves to be accepted, as it is within proximity of truth and same could not have been ignored by the Tribunal and the High Court on hyper technical grounds”, the Bench held.

Loss of marriage prospects

The Bench observed that the Claimant could not get married due to 75% bodily disability and is thus entitled to be compensated for loss of marriage prospects. It has been held as under:

“On account of the injuries sustained claimant has suffered 75% whole body disability. He has clearly deposed that on account of the injuries sustained and consequential disability suffered his marriage prospects have become bleak. Even in the affidavit filed on 30.09.2022 he has deposed that he has remained unmarried and none has come forward to marry him. In other words, the prospects of appellant getting married would remain a dream and for loss of the same he has to be suitably awarded compensation. Hence, we award a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards the “loss of marriage prospects.”

The Bench placed reliance on Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and others, (2009) 6 SCC 121, to compute the compensation towards ‘Loss of Future Income’ has awarded Rs.12,96,000/- to the Claimant towards the same.

Further, the compensation under ‘Loss of earnings during laid up period’ has been revised by taking Rs. 8,000/- as the monthly income of Claimant.

The Bench has revised/enhanced the compensation to Rs. 15,94,812/- with 6% p.a. interest from the date of filing the petition.

Case Title: Sri Lakshmana Gowda B.N. v The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Co. Ltd. and Another

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 528; 2023 INSC 611

Counsel for Appellant: Mr. C.B. Gururaj, Mr. Prakash Ranjan Nayak, Pramit Chhetri and Animesh Dube, Advocates.

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. T. Mahipal and Mr. Rohit K. Sinha.

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment