Explore the court’s insightful legal analysis on compensation in a motor accident case, focusing on the fair assessment of disability and loss of income. The court’s meticulous evaluation of the nature of injuries and the appellant’s circumstances highlights the importance of just compensation in cases of negligence. Stay tuned to understand the nuances of the legal proceedings and the significance of precise assessments in such cases.
Facts
- The appellant suffered nine injuries, with seven being grievous in nature.
- The Orthopedic Surgeon who operated on the appellant testified that she had a 32% total body disability and was unable to perform household work.
- The accident occurred on 25.12.2008 when a lorry negligently collided with the bus the appellant was travelling in, owned by respondent no.3.
- The appellant, a housewife, is appealing against the inadequate compensation provided in the motor accident case.
- P.W.4, the Orthopedic Surgeon, assessed the whole body disability of the appellant at 32% due to nine injuries, seven of which were grievous.
- The Tribunal erroneously assessed the whole body disability at 15% instead of 32%.
- The High Court corrected the assessment to 20%, still below the actual 32% disability.
- The appellant’s claimed profession as a tailor earning Rs.6,000/- p.m. was rejected due to lack of evidence.
- The notional income of the appellant as a housewife was assessed at Rs.4,250/- by the High Court.
- The appellant was awarded Rs.3,00,000/- for medical expenses instead of the claimed Rs.4,00,000/- due to lack of acceptable evidence.
Also Read: Analysis of Intent in Fatal Assault Case
Arguments
- Appellant claimed income of Rs.6,000/- per month from tailoring business
- Income assessed at Rs.4,250/- per month deemed inadequate
- Medical opinion of P.W.4 on disability reduced arbitrarily to 20%
- Appellant’s counsel argues for assessment of loss of income based on claimed Rs.6,000/- per month
Also Read: Ensuring Fair and Thorough Police Investigations: A Legal Perspective
Analysis
- The court agrees that the initial award of Rs.25,000 for loss of amenities and future happiness is inadequate.
- The court considers the nature of injuries and the age of the appellant in making this decision.
- Therefore, the award is enhanced to Rs.50,000 to better reflect the circumstances.
Also Read: Presumption of Genuineness in Legal Documents Case
Decision
- The appellant is held entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 7,54,910/-
- The compensation amount includes interest at the rate of six per cent from the date of petition till realization
- The appeal is allowed with the compensation under that head redrawn to Rs. 2,12,160/-
Case Title: SAVITHA Vs. M/S CHODAMANDALAM M.S. GENERAL INSURNACE COMPANY (2020 INSC 430)
Case Number: C.A. No.-002611-002611 / 2020
