While granting enhanced compensation to a man who suffered grievous injuries in a motor accident, the Supreme Court has held that the discretion to award compensation in excess of the amount claimed in the petition is based on the evidence on record and for reasons recorded for granting just and fair compensation.

The appeal before the Apex Court arose from a matter relating to enhancement of compensation in a motor accident case.

The Division Bench of Justice K.V. Viswanathan and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti held, “In Nagappa v. Gurudayal Singh and others, this Court held that there is no restriction on the Tribunal in awarding compensation exceeding the claimed amount under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the function of the Tribunal is to award just compensation which is reasonable based on the evidence produced on record. Keeping in view the above ratio, in a given case, the discretion to award compensation in excess of the amount claimed in the petition is based on the evidence on record and for reasons recorded for granting just and fair compensation.”

Factual Background

The case dates back to the year 2012 when the appellant met with an accident while he was riding a two-wheeler. A Jeep came in a rash and negligent manner from the opposite direction without sounding a horn and hit the Appellant’s motorcycle. The accident resulted in grievous injuries to the Appellant. The said jeep was owned by the first respondent and insured by the second respondent Insurance Company. The Appellant filed a claim petition, claiming a sum of Rs 15 lakh as compensation on the file of the Tribunal.

The appeal was filed for the enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and for the award of the claimed compensation. The Appellant was stated to be 21 years of age and was working as an accounts assistant, earning a monthly salary of Rs. 9,000 per month. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs 3,98,017 with interest at 7.5%. The High Court, through the impugned Judgment, enhanced the head – “Loss of Earning due to Functional Disability” – to Rs 12,48,000 by increasing his income by Rs. 500 and considering his Functional Disability as 100%. The appeal thus came to be filed before the High Court for further enhancement of compensation.

Reasoning

The Bench referred to the judgment in Nagappa v. Gurudayal Singh and others (2003), wherein it was held that there is no restriction on the Tribunal in awarding compensation exceeding the claimed amount under the Motor Vehicles Act.

Taking note of the loss of monthly income, the Bench added 1/3rd of the salary as the future loss of income, totalling Rs 8667. It was noticed that the Appellant further claimed a lump sum to meet the expenses of an attender, enabling him to attend to his regular household chores and functions. “We keep in our perspective the age of the Appellant (21 years) during the incident and the requirement of a personal attendant, and award a lump sum of Rs. 3,00,000/. Over and above the loss of income arrived at by this Judgment and the High Court, the Appellant claims reimbursement of medical expenses said to have been incurred while undergoing treatment in the hospital”, it held.

Thus, allowing the appeal in part, the Bench granted a compensation amounting to Rs 21,75,681.

Cause Title: R. Logeshkumar v. P. Balasubramaniam (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 1392)

Click here to read/download Judgment



Justice KV ViswanathanJustice SVN Bhatti

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.