Functional disability compensation must account for the claimant’s occupation as a driver.

The claimant appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the MACT, Bengaluru, for injuries sustained in a road accident involving a motorcycle

The Tribunal had awarded a total of ₹3,85,860, including ₹2,25,060 for loss of future income, ₹31,000 for loss of income during treatment, and ₹20,000 for future medical expenses

The High Court records the accident date as 14 December 2023 in its account of the claim, but later refers to it as 14 December 2021; the judgment does not reconcile this discrepancy

The claimant sought enhancement for disability-related future income loss, laid-up-period income loss, and future medical expenses

Whether the claimant’s income and functional disability should be reassessed for calculating loss of future income

Whether the claimant was entitled to enhanced compensation for loss of income during the laid-up period and future medical expenses

Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, provides for an appeal against a Tribunal’s award

In assessing compensation for disability, the Court considered the claimant’s income, age-based multiplier, occupation, injuries, and functional impact of the disability; it also assessed income loss during the recovery period and future medical expenses by reference to the evidence and circumstances of the claim

The judgment cites no precedent or additional statutory provision.

The Court accepted the claimant’s driving licence and occupation as a driver as grounds to assess monthly income at ₹17,000, above the stated 2023 notional income of ₹16,250 for an unskilled worker

Given the claimant’s driving occupation, femur fracture, and the doctor’s evidence of 16% whole-body disability, the Court assessed functional disability at 14%, rather than the Tribunal’s 11%, and recalculated future income loss using multiplier 11

It allowed three months’ income loss during recovery and increased future medical expenses to account for the proposed implant-removal operation

The difference between the revised and original awards under those heads produced an enhancement of ₹1,19,100

The claimant was awarded enhanced compensation of ₹1,19,100, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization.

The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced amount with interest before the Tribunal within six weeks, and the claimant was permitted to withdraw the entire enhancement