Madras HC Raises Accident Compensation to ₹9.25 Lakh for 70-Year-Old Amputee Whose 80% Disability Left Him Unable to Continue Milk and Farm Work

Ranganathan filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for injuries sustained when a Bolero Jeep struck him while he was cycling on 7 January 2020.

The Tribunal found the Jeep’s driver negligent and, relying on a Medical Board assessment of 80% disability, awarded ₹6,37,197, including ₹3,36,000 for loss of functional disability, calculated using a monthly income of ₹7,000 and a multiplier of 5.

After the award, Ranganathan died, and his legal representatives appealed, seeking enhancement. They contended that his income had been understated and that his injuries had substantially impaired his earning capacity; the insurer opposed enhancement.

The High Court noted that the accident and negligence were not in dispute.

Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, provides for a claim for compensation arising from a motor accident, and Section 173 provides for an appeal against the Tribunal’s award.

For quantifying loss of earning capacity, the Court applied the multiplier method, referring to Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, which the Tribunal had used to select a multiplier of 5 for a claimant aged 70; no future prospects were added.

The Court assessed functional disability by considering the nature and extent of the injuries and their effect on the claimant’s occupation and daily activities.

The Medical Board assessed 80% disability following a compound fracture, failed treatment and above-knee amputation. The Court found that the injuries prevented Ranganathan from continuing his milk business and agricultural work and left him unable to perform daily activities without assistance, supporting the use of the multiplier method and an 80% functional-disability assessment.

Although the claimed monthly income of ₹25,000 was unsupported by proof, the Court considered the accident year and the claimant’s age and increased the assessed monthly income from ₹7,000 to ₹13,000. Applying the multiplier of 5 and disability rate of 80%, it recalculated the loss-of-functional-disability award as ₹6,24,000.

It found the Tribunal’s awards under the remaining heads just and proper.

The total compensation was enhanced from ₹6,37,197 to ₹9,25,197, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the claim-petition filing date until deposit, excluding the 61-day period of delay specified in the earlier order.

Respondents 2 and 3 were directed to deposit the amount, less any sum already deposited, within six weeks; each appellant was permitted to withdraw ₹3,08,399, together with applicable interest and costs, subject to the stated directions.