Functional disability for professional drivers must be assessed at 100% in cases of bilateral limb amputation.

The appellant, Rakesh Kumar, a professional driver, met with a road accident on June 13, 2014, when a Tata Tempo hit his motorcycle, resulting in the crushing and subsequent bilateral amputation of both his legs

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded a compensation of ₹54,51,000 via an award dated October 16, 2018, based on a 90% permanent disability certification

The appellant approached the High Court seeking enhancement of compensation, contending that his functional disability should be assessed at 100% given his vocation as a driver and that the costs for future artificial limbs were inadequately covered

Whether the functional disability of the claimant should be enhanced from 90% to 100% considering his profession as a driver and bilateral amputation

Whether the monthly income of the claimant should include "perks" in addition to the base salary

Whether the compensation awarded for the procurement and maintenance of artificial limbs was sufficient given the claimant’s age and the lifespan of prosthetics

The Court primarily applied the principles laid down in *Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar (2011) 1 SCC 343*, which establishes that the Tribunal must assess the actual impact of a permanent disability on the claimant’s specific earning capacity rather than relying solely on medical percentages

It further relied on *Chanappa Nagappa Muchalagoda v. New India Insurance Co. Ltd. (2020) 1 SCC 796* and *S. Suresh v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (2010) 13 SCC 777*, which held that the loss of a limb renders a driver 100% functionally disabled as they can no longer perform their vocation or obtain a driving license

Regarding prosthetics, the court followed *Mohd Sabeer Alias Shabir Hussain v. Regional Manager, UPSRTC (2022) SCC OnLine SC 1701*, which mandates compensation for multiple prosthetic replacements based on a life expectancy of 70 years

The Court observed that since the claimant was a professional commercial driver, the bilateral amputation of his legs resulted in a complete loss of his ability to perform his vocation or any other manual labour, justifying an upgrade of functional disability to 100%

Regarding income, the Court declined to include the ₹3,000 "perks" because testimony revealed these were variable outstation bonuses and not fixed salary components

On the issue of prosthetics, the Court found the MACT’s award of ₹4,50,000 inadequate.

By calculating the claimant's remaining life expectancy (~38 years) and the 7-year average life of a prosthetic limb, the Court determined that the claimant would require at least four replacements

It factored in inflation and annual maintenance costs of ₹50,000 to arrive at a revised cost of ₹6,00,000 per limb cycle

The Court held that: (i) functional disability is 100%

(ii) future prospects are maintained at 40%

and (iii) compensation for artificial limbs is increased to ₹28,50,000

The Insurance Company was directed to deposit the enhanced amount within six weeks.

Notably, the Court ordered that ₹6,00,000 be released by the Tribunal specifically each time a new prosthetic is procured, subject to the production and verification of authentic bills