Motor Accident
Compensation—Disablement resulting in loss of income—Five injuries which are permanent in nature apparently make him unfit for any employment even though disability may be 60% or 85%—Compression fractures of seven cervical vertebra resulting into Paraplegia and further loss of bladder function make it absolutely impossible for a person to work and be gainfully employed—Considering the nature of disability, loss of income is, thus, held to be 100% and not 50% as held by the High Court.
[Para 14]
Compensation—Uncertainties of life—High Court deducted 1/3rd towards uncertainties of life, but this has been disapproved in the case of Leela Gupta v. State, 2010 (12) SCC 37 as the same is covered while applying the multiplier—This deduction by the High Court is held to be incorrect and no deduction should be made for uncertainties in life.
[Para 15]
Compensation—Deduction towards personal expenses—High Court deducted 50% of compensation towards personal expenses—Case being not of death and claim not being made by the dependents, but the same being by a survivor in the accident with severe injuries resulting into permanent disability, there could not be any justification for deduction of personal expenses—Court do not approve the said deduction in view of the judgment of Lalan D. v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., 2020 (9) SCC 805.
[Para 16]
Compensation—Multiplier—Considering the admitted age of the appellant to be 19 years at the time of the accident in view of the judgment in the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (6) SCC 121, the multiplier to be applied would be 18 and not 17.
[Para 17]
Compensation—Attendant expenses—Considering the nature of injuries and the permanent disabilities suffered by the appellant, he would require 24 hours help/assistance of an attendant—In view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Chaus Tausif Almiya v. Memon Mohammad Umar Anwarbhai, Civil Appeal Nos.1241-1242 of 2023, which had similar facts regarding disability, a compensation of Rs.10,80,000/- awarded towards this head.
[Para 18]
Compensation—Future Medical Expenses No compensation has been awarded under the said heading—Medical expenses would continue all his life—Regular consultation and daily medication would require expenses—Considering the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Chaus Tausif Almiya v. Memon Mohammad Umar Anwarbhai, Civil Appeal Nos.1241-1242 of 2023, a compensation of Rs.9,72,000/- awarded towards future medical expenses by applying the multiplier of 18.
[Para 19]
Compensation—Loss of marriage prospects—No compensation has been awarded under the said head—Considering the nature of injuries duly approved and certified, the appellant would be entitled to compensation under loss of marriage prospects—Relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Chaus Tausif Almiya v. Memon Mohammad Umar Anwarbhai, Civil Appeal Nos.1241-1242 of 2023, a fixed compensation of Rs.3 lakhs awarded under the said head.
[Para 20]
Compensation—Pain and suffering—High Court has awarded Rs.1 lakh—Kind of pain, agony and suffering undergone and also for future the amount awarded is less—Considering the amount awarded in other cases namely Master Ayush Vs. The Branch Manager, 2022 (7) SCC 738 a sum of Rs.3 lakhs awarded under this head.
[Para 21]
Compensation—Loss of income—Statement of the accountant of the Law College, where the deceased was working, that the salary of deceased was Rs. 12235/- on the date of the accident—Widow of deceased had specifically stated that her husband was earning additional income Rs.25,000/- per year on account of assessment of examination papers—Once, it is accepted that the deceased was additionally earning on account of assessment of examination papers, then entire benefit as claimed should have been extended rather than reducing it for no justifiable reason.
[Paras 29 & 30]
Compensation—Future prospects—Both the courts below have not granted any amount towards future prospects—Law is now well settled by the Constitution Bench judgment in case of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680 that future prospects should be added with the income depending upon the age of the deceased—If the deceased was between the age of 50- 60 years which is the present case, there should be an addition of 15% towards future prospects—An addition of 15% towards future prospects allowed.
[Para 31]
Compensation—Deduction towards personal expenses—Courts below have deducted 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses of the deceased—Submission of appellant that such deduction is excessive and not in accordance to the judgment of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (6) SCC 121 as approved by the Constitution Bench judgment in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680—If the family members are 2 or 3, then 1/3rd deduction is justified, however, where the dependent family members were 4 to 6, the deduction should be 1/4th and in case of more than 6 dependent family members, the deduction should be 1/5th—As the dependent family members are at least 4, the deduction should have been 1/4th.
[Para 32] 
Compensation—Towards loss of consortium—MACT had granted a meagre amount of Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of consortium—High Court granted a total amount of Rs. 70,000/- as consolidated amount under all conventional heads, which included loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses—In the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, Constitution Bench of the Apex Court had provided that all dependents should be separately awarded towards loss of consortium and had actually awarded Rs.40,000/- to each of the dependents—Considering the same, an amount of Rs.40,000/- each is awarded to each of the four dependents towards loss of consortium.
[Para 33]
Compensation—Towards Loss of Estate and Funeral Expenses—Tribunal had awarded Rs. 2,500/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses—High Court had awarded a consolidated amount of Rs. 70,000/- under all conventional heads, which is set aside by the Apex Court—Amount awarded for loss of estate and loss of funeral expenses is too less and accordingly increase the same to Rs. 15,000/- under both the heads separately.
[Para 34]