Orissa HC Raises Injured TV Scriptwriter’s Compensation To ₹21.09 Lakh, Assessing 25% Functional Disability Against 60% Locomotor Impairment

The claimant appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Tribunal’s award of ₹7,30,000 with interest for injuries sustained in a motor accident.

The insurer had satisfied the award and did not appeal, leaving the Tribunal’s findings of monthly income of ₹20,000 and 60% permanent disability undisturbed.

The Tribunal had accepted his work as a television scriptwriter but found no evidence that he practised as an advocate.

The injuries included fractures and other serious trauma to his legs; the Medical Board assessed 60% permanent locomotor disability.

Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, provides for an appeal against an award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal; the underlying claim was made under Section 166.

In assessing loss of future income, the Court applied the multiplier method, using the claimant’s income, functional disability, age-based multiplier and future prospects.

It relied on National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, for the addition of future prospects to income.

The Court treated the percentage of permanent medical disability as distinct from the percentage of functional disability relevant to calculating loss of earning capacity.

The Court held that the 60% locomotor impairment did not automatically establish 60% whole-body or functional disability.

Because the claimant’s injuries affected his legs but not his hands, which he principally used for scriptwriting, the Court assessed his functional disability at 25%.

It accepted the established monthly income of ₹20,000 as a scriptwriter and declined to include income from legal practice because the claimant had produced no supporting evidence.

Applying 40% future prospects, a multiplier of 16 for the claimant’s age of 34, and 25% functional disability, it calculated loss of future income at ₹13,44,000.

It then fixed total compensation at ₹21,09,000 and deducted the ₹7,30,000 already awarded.

The claimant was awarded enhanced compensation of ₹13,79,000, with simple interest at 6% per annum from 20 May 2010 until payment.

The insurer was directed to pay within eight weeks; if deposited before the Tribunal, 80% of the enhanced amount was to be kept in fixed deposits.