Facts
On 30 March 2021, the three appellants were travelling in a Maruti Ertiga driven by respondent No. 1 when it left the road and overturned; each sustained injuries.
Source reference: para. 3–4They brought separate claims in MVC Nos. 386/2021, 387/2021 and 388/2021.
Source reference: para. 9–10The Tribunal awarded ₹30,000, ₹25,000 and ₹78,200 respectively, holding the respondents jointly and severally liable and directing the insurer to pay, with interest at 6% per annum.
Source reference: para. 9–10The injured claimants appealed, seeking enhancement.
Source reference: para. 11–14Issues
1. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the three claim petitions was inadequate and required modification
Source reference: para. 16(i)2. Whether the Tribunal’s award of interest at 6% per annum required modification
Source reference: para. 16(ii)Law Applied
The appeals were brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Source reference: case headingIn assessing compensation for disability-related future income, the Court considered whether the evidence established functional disability affecting earning capacity; a medical disability percentage alone did not establish such loss.
Source reference: para. 19–20, 28–29, 33–34For MVC No. 388/2021, the Court applied Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 ACJ 1298, using multiplier 9 for the claimant’s age group of 56–60.
Source reference: para. 36It also used the Karnataka Legal Services Authority’s notional-income chart, fixing monthly income at ₹14,250 for an accident in 2021.
Source reference: para. 35Reasoning
For the claimant in MVC No. 386/2021, the Court found that although she had sustained a clavicle fracture, the evidence did not establish functional disability affecting her earning capacity; it therefore declined future-income compensation but increased amounts for pain and suffering, laid-up-period income and loss of amenities, and allowed medical expenses.
Source reference: para. 18–27In MVC No. 387/2021, the injury was simple, there was no fracture or evidence of hospitalisation, and the disability evidence was not supported by the record; the Court accordingly declined disability-based compensation but added the proved medical bills to the Tribunal’s global award.
Source reference: para. 28–32In MVC No. 388/2021, the Court accepted 5% disability to the limb, applied the notional income and multiplier, and awarded future-income loss; it also increased or added compensation for laid-up-period income, pain and suffering, and loss of amenities and nutritional food.
Source reference: para. 33–42On interest, the Court found no reason to increase the 6% rate and retained it.
Source reference: para. 43–46Holding
The appeals were allowed in part.
The compensation was modified to ₹60,400 in MVC No. 386/2021, ₹32,565 in MVC No. 387/2021 and ₹1,46,200 in MVC No. 388/2021.
Source reference: para. 47(i)–(v)The enhanced amounts carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim petitions until payment; the insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced compensation and accrued interest with the Tribunal within six weeks of receiving the certified judgment.
Source reference: para. 47(vi)–(vii)Acts & Sections Cited
5 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Motor Vehicles Act, 19885
Original Court PDF
SM N R BASAMMA W/O N R VEERANA GOUDAvsSRI SHARANA GOUDA N R S/O VEERANA GOUDA N R
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
