Insurer remains liable where the charge-sheeted rider pleaded guilty and medical evidence supported accident causation.

The claimant, a pillion rider, sustained injuries in a road accident on 20 December 2019 involving motorcycle KA-20-EA-3129.

The Tribunal partly allowed his claim under the Motor Vehicles Act and awarded ₹2,27,818 with interest at 6% per annum.

The claimant appealed seeking enhancement; the insurer appealed challenging liability, contending that the claimant had fallen from the motorcycle after suffering a fit rather than because of negligent riding.

The claimant’s injuries included a D1 vertebra fracture and a closed head injury; the doctor assessed 12% locomotor disability of the body.

1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in fastening liability on the insurer.

2. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal required enhancement.

The appeals were brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Court considered the charge sheet for offences under Sections 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the rider’s admission that he had pleaded guilty as evidence bearing on negligence.

In assessing compensation, the Court considered the claimant’s injuries, medical evidence, functional disability, occupation, age, and the applicable multiplier; it applied the multiplier of 14 and assessed functional disability at 8%.

No judicial precedent was cited in the judgment.

The Court rejected the insurer’s account that the claimant fell because of a fit. The rider’s guilty plea and the charge sheet supported the finding that the accident resulted from negligent riding, while the doctor confirmed that the claimant’s injuries were consistent with a road traffic accident and had not treated him for fits.

On quantum, the Court found the awards for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, attendant and related expenses, and laid-up-period income inadequate in light of the injuries and eight-day hospital admission.

Having regard to the doctor’s evidence of 12% locomotor disability, the malunited fracture, and the claimant’s occupation and age, it assessed functional disability at 8% and calculated future income loss as ₹14,000 × 12 × 14 × 8% = ₹1,88,160.

It left the medical-expense award unchanged.

It enhanced total compensation to ₹4,31,161, an increase of ₹2,03,343 over the Tribunal’s award, and directed the insurer to deposit the enhanced amount with interest at 6% per annum.

The judgment states that interest on the enhanced amount runs from the date of the petition until realisation at paragraph 16, while the operative order at paragraph 18(iii) says “from the date of realisation”; the two formulations are inconsistent.

The claimant was permitted to withdraw the entire enhanced compensation, and any amount in deposit was to be transmitted to the Tribunal.