Functional disability must reflect the claimant’s vocation and resulting loss of livelihood.

The claimants appealed against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s award dated 1 July 2023, seeking enhancement of compensation for injuries sustained in a motor accident.

The Tribunal assessed Mohd. Khalid’s functional disability at 22% and Afsar Ali’s at 20%, despite Safdarjung Hospital Medical Board assessments of permanent disability at 43% and 39%, respectively, in relation to the right lower limb.

Both had worked as loaders for Cambata Aviation Pvt. Ltd., which closed in 2016, and had not been re-employed.

The Tribunal also awarded each claimant Rs.15,000 for loss of amenities.

1. Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of each claimant’s functional disability should be increased, having regard to the nature of their work and the effect of their injuries on their livelihood

2. Whether the compensation for loss of amenities should be enhanced

3. Whether Afsar Ali’s loss-of-income calculation required correction

The Court applied the Supreme Court’s principles in Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar, (2011) 1 SCC 343, under which functional disability is assessed by considering the injured person’s vocation and the extent to which the disability affects their capacity to earn and pursue their livelihood; it is not determined solely by the percentage of permanent physical disability.

The judgment cites no statutory provision as the basis for its decision.

The Court found that both claimants had performed labour-oriented work as loaders, which required physical fitness. In those circumstances, their functional disability should not be assessed merely by taking approximately half of their certified permanent disability. The Court therefore increased Khalid’s functional disability to 30% and Ali’s to 25%.

It also considered Rs.15,000 inadequate for loss of amenities and increased that award to Rs.30,000 for each claimant.

For Ali, it corrected the loss-of-income figure by using monthly income of Rs.16,080 rather than Rs.16,023.

It directed that the enhanced amounts be deposited with the Tribunal within six weeks and released to the respective claimants as lump sums; the original awards, if unpaid, were also to be released in accordance with the Tribunal’s directions.

The Tribunal’s right-of-recovery directions against the driver and owner were sustained, and both appeals were disposed of.

For Ali, the compensation table records interest at 7.5%, whereas the operative direction specifies 9% per annum on the enhanced amount.