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

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.

Amendment of plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC explained

Cause Title :  Ganesh Prasad vs Rajeshwar Prasad, SLP (C) NO. 28377 OF 2018, Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : 14/3/2023 Corum : J. B. Pardiwala, J. Citied:  Revajeetu Builders and Developers v. Narayanaswamy & Sons and Others reported in (2009) 10 SCC 84 North Eastern Railway Administration, Gorakhpur v. Bhagwan Das reported in (2008) 8 SCC 511 P.A. Jayalakshmi v. H. Saradha and Others reported in (2009) 14 SCC 525 B.K. Narayana Pillai v. Parameswaran Pillai and Another reported in (2000) 1 SCC 712 A.K. Gupta and Sons Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corporation reported in AIR 1967 SC 96 Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited and Another, Civil Appeal No. 5909 of 2022 dated 01.09.2022 Firm Sriniwas Ram Kumar v. Mahabir Prasad and Others reported in AIR 1951 SC 177 G. Nagamma and Another v. Siromanamma and Another reported in (1996) 2 SCC 25 Praful Manohar Rele v. Krishnabai Narayan Ghosalkar and Others reported in (2014...