Skip to main content

Accident victim awarded Rs. 30 lakh compensation - SC

If a student meets with a road accident and becomes permanently disabled, his/her potential future earnings must be taken into consideration by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals and High Courts in order to award a just compensation. This was ruled by the Supreme Court while ordering a compensation of Rs. 30.93 lakh to a girl who lost both legs in an accident in 2005 when she was 16 years old.

A Bench of Justices Gyan Sudha Misra (since retired) and V. Gopala Gowda said, “Having regard to the undisputed fact that there has been inflation of money in the country since the occurrence of the accident, the same has to be taken into account by the tribunal. The fact that the appellant [in this case] was a brilliant student at the time of the accident should also be taken into consideration while awarding the compensation to her. Thus, the claimant-appellant, V. Mekala, is entitled to a total amount of Rs. 30.93 lakh as compensation with an interest at 9 per cent per annum.”

The appellant had secured first rank in her Class X exam. The court said the girl would have had a better future in terms of educational career and she could have got a suitable public or private employment. However, on account of the permanent disability she suffered due to the accident, that opportunity is lost to her. “Therefore, she is entitled to compensation under the heads ‘loss of income’ and ‘future prospects’,” the court said.

“In an accident, if a person loses a limb or eye or sustains an injury, the court, while computing damages for the loss of organs or physical injury, does not value a limb or eye in isolation, but values totality of the harm which the loss has entailed,” the Bench said.

In this case, the claimant had been awarded Rs. 6.46 lakh as compensation by the tribunal and the Madras High Court had enhanced it to Rs. 18.22 lakh. She filed the present appeal for further hike in compensation.

Allowing her appeal, the Bench directed the insurance company to deposit 50 per cent of the awarded amount with proportionate interest within four weeks in a nationalised bank and pay the balance 50 per cent within four weeks. The Bench sought compliance report from the insurance company within five weeks thereafter.

Article referred: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/accident-victim-awarded-rs-30-lakh-compensation/article6003071.ece

Comments

Most viewed this month

Merits and the terms of contract are irrelevant for invoking of the bank guarantees

In Sabarkantha Annuity Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NHAI and Ors, the Petitioner filed before the Delhi High Court  petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 with a prayer that, Respondents be restrained from acting upon the letter dated 15th September, 2017 or from invoking the Bid securities of the Petitioner to the tune of Rs. 10.93 Crores and also restraining the banks from honouring the invocation of said bank guarantees on behalf of Respondent No. 1 acting in terms of letter dated 3rd November, 2007. Petitioner has relied upon Clauses Nos. 9.1.1, 9.1.2 and 4.3 of the agreement dated 28th April, 2017 entered into between the parties to say the claim for damages since is not a claim for a sum presently due and payable and the respondent would be entitled to damages only on proof of loss, per Clause 4.3 of the agreement and hence is not entitle to the entire sum of bid security.  The Court found that Clause No. 9.1.2 speaks of an exclusiv...

Right of pre-emption under West Bengal Land Reform Act

In Rabindra Nath Kundu & Anr vs Sudhir Hira, Bijoy Krishna Hira being the owner in the suit plot, gifted to Santosh Kumar Hira demarcated 11 decimals of land vide deed of gift dated 27.4.2004 and the latter sold 9 decimals out of 11 decimals of land to Sudhir Hira the preemptor/opposite party no. 1 and well demarcated 1.65 decimals of land in the said plot along with several other plots were sold, transferred and conveyed to the preemptees/petitioners herein by a registered deed of sale dated 10.8.2010, the subject matter of preemption. It is argued on behalf of the preemptees that  the present opposite party no. 1/preemptor Sudhir Hira has no relationship of co-sharership with Santosh Kumar Hira opposite party no. 2 as the demarcated portion of land has been purchased. It is settled principle of law that partial preemption is not permissible and this was what the view adopted by this Hon'ble High Court is Surendra Vs. Abhimannu reported in (1980) 1 Cal LJ 135 whe...

CBI has no jurisdiction to probe affairs of medical college:HC

The Madras High Court has quashed charges against administrators of a medical college and dismissed CBI's petitions opposing discharge of officials of two other medical colleges, saying the investigation agency, or any other external agency for that matter, has no jurisdiction to probe the affairs of a medical college. Quashing the charges against the administrators of a medical college and dismissing CBI's petitions opposing the discharge of officials of two other medical colleges, Justice Aruna Jagadeesan said "contravention of rules and regulations may be an offence against the statute but is not a crime. There is no room or jurisdiction for any external agency to investigate the affairs of any medical institution coming within the purview of the Medical Council of India." In identical set of orders, all delivered on August 6, Justice Jagadeesan said "the shortfall in faculties and submissions of fake/forged documents would only disentitle the institution...