Compensation Calculation for Paraplegic Patient

In a recent legal case, the court engaged in a detailed analysis to calculate compensation for a paraplegic patient. The focus was on aspects such as minimum wages, future earnings loss, medical expenses, and other essential factors. Let’s delve deeper into the legal intricacies of this significant judgment.

Facts

  • The appellant, a paraplegic patient, has suffered severe injuries in a road accident at the age of 5.
  • The injuries include complete sensory loss in the legs, urinary incontinence, bowel constipation, and bed sores as per the discharge summary.
  • The appellant, the Head of the Department at Kasturba Medical College Hospital, is dependent on others for routine work due to the disability.
  • Witness testimonies from PW-1 Krishna Sapalya, PW-2 Dr. Amithish Narayana, and PW-3 Dr. S. Adanthya confirm the extent of the appellant’s injuries.
  • The High Court awarded a compensation of Rs. 13,46,805/- which is challenged by the appellant for being inadequate compared to the Rs. 18,24,000/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
  • The High Court assessed the notional income of the victim at Rs.15,000/- p.a., which was deemed unjustified by this Court.
  • The Tribunal rejected the claim of taxi expenses amounting to Rs.1,51,500/- citing lack of evidence regarding the taxi driver and necessity for using a taxi.
  • Compensation to be assessed based on minimum wages, considering the assumption that the appellant would have been able to earn after attaining majority.
  • In addition to skilled minimum wages, appellant entitled to 40% for future prospects as per the judgment in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi & Ors.
  • Total compensation calculated to be Rs.5180/- per month.
  • Appellant argued medical expenses were Rs.5,73,700/-, but High Court awarded only Rs.1,61,805/- enhanced to Rs.70,000/-.
  • Tribunal’s observation on the father’s occupation refuted, as being a Secretary of Gram Panchayat qualifies as a government servant.
  • Citing a relevant case, multiplier to be applied as per Schedule II of the Act.
  • High Court awarded Rs. 5,00,000/- for future medical expenses, device weight limitation noted by Dr. Amitesh Narayana.
  • Appellant given inadequate amounts for attendant charges and disability as per the Tribunal’s decision.
  • Minimum wages in the State at the time of the accident rounded off to Rs.3700/-, conveyance charges set at Rs.20,000/-.
  • Minimum wages for a skilled workman in 2010-11 is Rs.3708.70 as per the extract from the Gazette.

Also Read: Landmark Judgment on Compensation for Fatal Accident

Analysis

  • The appellant is paralyzed in both legs with sensory loss, urinary incontinence, bowel constipation, and bed sores.
  • Compensation awarded for loss of marriage prospects and cost of devices needed for ambulation.
  • Entitlement to one attendant for life and replacement of devices every 5 years.
  • Difficulty in quantifying mental and physical losses in monetary terms.
  • Appellant has lost childhood and adult life due to the injuries.
  • Medical certificate indicates the use of ARGO and crutches for ambulation.
  • Comparison with another case involving a bedridden individual with a mental age of 9 months.
  • Challenges in proving taxi expenses due to lack of specific details.
  • Multiplier of 18 applicable for calculation of future earnings loss due to permanent disability.

Also Read: Land Acquisition Compensation Analysis

Decision

  • The compensation amount is Rs. 10,00,000 along with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of filing till realization.
  • The guardian can withdraw funds based on medical opinion for major medical expenses during the appellant’s minority.
  • Rs. 2 lakhs awarded for conveyance charges.
  • The appellant being a minor, the awarded amount will be disbursed to the father as the guardian.
  • If more than Rs. 10,00,000 has already been disbursed, it will not be adjusted.
  • The remaining amount will be invested in Fixed Deposits Receipts to maximize interest.

Also Read: Judicial Review of Search and Seizure Authorization

Case Title: MASTER AYUSH Vs. THE BRANCH MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. (2022 INSC 364)

Case Number: C.A. No.-002205-002206 / 2022

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *