Functional disability must account for the claimant’s injuries and avocation.

The claimant sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for injuries sustained in a road accident on 22 May 2017.

The Tribunal assessed compensation at ₹5,55,047, including ₹3,56,400 for loss of future income, based on 15% disability, and awarded interest at 6% per annum.

The claimant appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the claimant’s functional disability and resulting loss of future income required enhancement

Whether the compensation awarded under pain and suffering, loss of amenities, and loss of income during the laid-up period required enhancement

The appeal was brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which provides for an appeal against an award of a Claims Tribunal.

In assessing compensation for permanent disability, the Court considered the claimant’s functional disability in light of the injuries and occupation, and applied the multiplier method to calculate loss of future income using the claimant’s monthly income, age-related multiplier, and disability percentage; it also allowed for future prospects.

The Court upheld the Tribunal’s use of a multiplier of 18 and notional monthly income of ₹11,000.

Although the doctor assessed whole-body disability at 41%, that assessment relied on a report whose author was not examined.

Having regard to the injuries, the claimant’s evidence, and his business occupation, the Court fixed functional disability at 20% and included 40% future prospects, calculating loss of future income at ₹6,65,280.

It enhanced pain and suffering to ₹60,000 and loss of amenities to ₹40,000, and increased laid-up-period income to ₹33,000 for three months.

It left medical expenses and attendant, conveyance, food and nourishment charges unchanged.

The Court enhanced total compensation to ₹9,29,927, an increase of ₹3,74,880, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization.

The claimant was not entitled to interest for the 586-day delay in filing the appeal.

The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced amount within six weeks; 50% was to be released to the claimant and the balance kept in a three-year fixed deposit.