01Facts
On 4 November 1995, the appellant was injured when the motorcycle he was riding was struck from behind by a motorcycle driven by opponent No. 1.
¶ 1–2 · pp. 1–2He filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
¶ 1–2 · pp. 1–2The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded ₹69,824 with interest at 7.5% per annum, assessing 15% whole-body disability but awarding no compensation for loss of future or prospective income.
¶ 1–2, 4 · pp. 1–2The appellant challenged the award, seeking just and fair compensation
¶ 1–2, 4 · pp. 1–202Issues
i.1. Whether the Tribunal erred by omitting compensation for loss of future or prospective income despite assessing the appellant’s whole-body disability at 15%.
¶ 4.1 · p. 2ii.2. Whether the compensation awarded should be enhanced, and, if so, by what amount and at what rate of interest.
¶ 4.1–4.2 · pp. 2–303Law Applied
The appeal was brought under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, while the underlying claim was made under Section 166.
¶ 1–2 · p. 1The Court applied the principle that compensation should be just and fair, including compensation for established loss of future income where supported by the evidence.
¶ 4.1 · pp. 2–3In calculating that loss, it used the appellant’s gross monthly salary, the assessed whole-body disability, a multiplier of 15, and a 40% addition for prospective income.
¶ 4.1 · pp. 2–3Provisions in the judgment · 2 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173Section 166
04Reasoning
The appellant’s salary slip showed gross monthly earnings of ₹6,054, but the Tribunal had used a lower figure to calculate six months’ actual loss of income and had made no award for future income.
¶ 4.1–4.2 · pp. 2–3Finding merit in the appellant’s challenge, the Court calculated annual disability-related income loss at ₹10,896 (15% of the annualised salary), applied a multiplier of 15 to reach ₹1,63,440, and added 40% for prospective income, or ₹65,376.
¶ 4.1–4.2 · pp. 2–3This produced ₹2,28,816 for future-income loss.
¶ 4.1–4.2 · pp. 2–3Adding the other compensation heads resulted in total compensation of ₹2,98,640, an enhancement of ₹2,28,816 over the Tribunal’s award.
¶ 4.1–4.2 · pp. 2–305Holding
The appeal was partly allowed.
¶ 4.2–5 · pp. 3–4The appellant was awarded additional compensation of ₹2,28,816, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition until realisation.
¶ 4.2–5 · pp. 3–4Opponent No. 3, the insurer, was directed to deposit the enhanced amount with the Tribunal within nine weeks; the Tribunal was directed to disburse the compensation to the appellant after due verification.
¶ 4.2–5 · pp. 3–4Original Court PDF
MOHANBHAI JAVERIBHAI DHODIAvsUMESHBHAI AMBALAL MISTRI
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
