Karnataka HC Assesses Brain-Injured Carpenter’s Functional Disability At 100%, Raises Compensation To ₹31.78 Lakh

In brief

The question

1. Whether the appellant’s 75% medical disability should be treated as 100% functional disability for assessing loss of future earning capacity

The court held

The appeal was allowed in part. The award was enhanced from Rs.10,15,774 to Rs.31,78,174, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization

It also directed

As the insurer had already deposited the Tribunal’s award, it was directed to deposit the enhanced amount of Rs.21,62,400, together with interest at 6%, within one month; the appellant was permitted to withdraw the amount deposited, with accrued interest

01Facts

The appellant, a carpenter aged 26, sustained a serious head injury in a road accident and suffered right-sided spastic hemiparesis, speech and memory impairment, and behavioural disturbances. Medical evidence assessed his permanent whole-body disability at 75%; he contended that his functional disability was 100% because he could no longer pursue carpentry

pp. 6–7

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.10,15,774 with interest at 6% per annum. He appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement

pp. 2–3

02Issues

i.1. Whether the appellant’s 75% medical disability should be treated as 100% functional disability for assessing loss of future earning capacity

pp. 4–5, 7–8

ii.2. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal should be enhanced, including by applying future prospects to the loss of earning capacity

p. 8

03Law Applied

Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal against an award of the Claims Tribunal

p. 2

In assessing loss of future earning capacity, medical disability and functional disability are distinct: the effect of the injury on the claimant’s ability to perform their particular occupation must be considered.

pp. 4–5, 7–8

Relying on R. Halle v. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited (Civil Appeal No. ___ of 2026, Diary No. 37186/2023), Kajal v. Jagdish Chand, AIR 2020 SC 776, and the Karnataka High Court’s decision in MFA No. 1405/2021, the Court applied the principle that functional disability may exceed the medically assessed disability where the claimant’s occupation and injuries warrant it

pp. 4–5, 7–8

It also relied on New India Assurance Company v. Abdul S/o. Mehaboob Tahasildar and Others, MFA No. 103807/2016, decided 27 May 2022, for allowing future prospects where disability exceeds 20%.

p. 8

The Court used the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority chart for notional income and applied the multiplier corresponding to the appellant’s age.

p. 5

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173

04Reasoning

Although the medical evidence assessed whole-body disability at 75%, the appellant’s permanent neurological impairments and his work as a manual carpenter meant he could not resume his occupation. The Court therefore assessed functional disability at 100%

pp. 6–8

In the absence of income proof, it fixed monthly income at Rs.9,000, applied 40% future prospects and the multiplier of 17, and calculated loss of future earning capacity at Rs.25,70,400 (Rs.9,000 + 40% × 12 × 17 × 100%)

p. 5, 8

It confirmed the Tribunal’s awards under the other heads, totalling Rs.5,? Wait compute confirmed heads: 75,000 + 50,000 + 50,000 + 1,00,000 + 3,32,774 = 6,07,774. With future 25,70,400 total 31,78,174. The court confirmed each item

pp. 8–9

05Holding

The appeal was allowed in part. The award was enhanced from Rs.10,15,774 to Rs.31,78,174, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization

pp. 9–10

pp. 10–11

LawLens.Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF