MV Act| Award Of Compensation Cannot Be Based On Any Mathematical Formula, Must Consider Nature Of Suffering & Pain: SC
The Supreme Court in an appeal relating to a motor accident claim has held that the award of compensation cannot be based on any mathematical formula, but has to be commensurate to the nature of suffering and pain, its extent, length, and duration.
The appellants preferred the appeals against the High Court decision and sought enhancement of the compensation before the Apex Court.
The two-Judge Bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Vikram Nath observed, “Considering the findings on the medical conditions of both the appellants, the amount awarded is less. Award of such compensation cannot be based on any mathematical formula, but has to be commensurate to the nature of suffering and pain, its extent, length and duration.”
The Bench while enhancing the compensation noted that the appellants considering their medical conditions, deserve to be suitably compensated for under the head ‘loss of marriage prospects’.
Advocate Vikalp Mudgal appeared on behalf of the appellants while Advocates Atul Nigam and Priya Puri appeared for the respondents.
In this case, the appellants while travelling together in the same vehicle met with an accident resulting in severe injuries to both. They claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act as they suffered permanent disability of 70% and 95%.
The Tribunal awarded compensation but being aggrieved with the same the appellants moved to the High Court and their appeals were partly allowed. Hence, the appellants approached the Supreme Court being dissatisfied with the High Court’s decision.
The Supreme Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case said, “With regard to the claim for future medical expenses for the appellant Alimiya who has suffered 95% disability and would require physiotherapy services throughout his life, the compensation awarded by the High Court at Rs. 3,00,000/- appears to be less.”
The Court further said that considering the medical condition of appellant who suffered 95% disability and the appellant who suffered 70% disability would require extra use of transportation even for going to short distances and hence it would be just and proper to award Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- to both respectively as transportation charges.
“Appellant Alimiya, because of his medical condition, cannot even stand or walk on his own and would therefore, require an attendant all his life. Applying the multiplier of 18, an amount of Rs. 10,80,000/- would be just and proper compensation under the aforesaid head. Both the appellants, considering their medical conditions, would be requiring special diet supplements which may be assessed at Rs. 1,00,000/-”, the Court asserted.
The Court, therefore, awarded an additional sum of Rs. 25,67,000/- to the appellant who suffered 95% disability along with the same interest as awarded by the High Court.
“… we award additional sum of Rs. 4,90,000/- to the appellant Sokat along with the same interest as awarded by the High Court”, the Court directed.
Accordingly, the Apex Court allowed the appeals.
Cause Title- Chaus Taushif Alimiya v. Memon Mahmmad Umar Anwarbhai & Ors.