Police Constable’s Salary Rose After Crash, Yet Gujarat HC Awards ₹5.87 Lakh For Future Income Loss From 14% Disability

In brief

The question

1. Whether the appellant was entitled to compensation for future loss of income despite continuing to receive his salary, with no reduction in salary or increments after the accident.

The court held

The appeal was partly allowed.

It also directed

The Court reassessed total compensation at Rs. 6,21,944, deducted the Rs. 25,000 already awarded, and granted enhanced compensation of Rs. 5,96,944.

The operative order directed the insurance company to deposit the enhanced amount with interest at 8% per annum from the date of the claim petition within six weeks; the Tribunal was directed to disburse the amount, subject to applicable court-fee deductions.

The judgment states 9% interest in paragraph 22, but the operative direction specifies 8%.

01Facts

On 22 January 2012, the appellant, a serving Police Constable, was injured when an autorickshaw struck his motorcycle.

p. 4

He sustained injuries including a fracture to the upper end of the right tibia and permanent impairment assessed at 28% of the right lower limb, treated as 14% of the whole body.

pp. 4, 14–15 · ¶ 17

His monthly income, after professional tax, was Rs. 14,557.

pp. 12–14 · ¶ 14–16

He remained on leave from 22 January to 18 April 2012, but his salary and increments were not reduced.

pp. 12–14 · ¶ 14–16

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 25,000 with interest at 8% per annum, declining compensation for future loss of income because his salary had not fallen.

pp. 1–3 · ¶ 1, 3–4.1

He appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement.

p. 1 · ¶ 1

02Issues

i.1. Whether the appellant was entitled to compensation for future loss of income despite continuing to receive his salary, with no reduction in salary or increments after the accident.

pp. 8–11 · ¶ 8–12

ii.2. Whether the Tribunal’s award required enhancement under other heads of compensation, including pain and suffering, special diet, attendant charges and transportation.

pp. 4–5, 16 · ¶ 4.4, 20

03Law Applied

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal from an award of a Claims Tribunal.

p. 1 · ¶ 1

Applying Mohd. Sabeer v. Regional Manager, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, 2023 ACJ 1, the Court held that a claimant with permanent disablement may be entitled to compensation for future loss of income and future prospects even where income has subsequently increased.

pp. 9–11, 15 · ¶ 9–11, 18

Under National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, the Court added 50% for future prospects for this salaried claimant, aged 35.

p. 15 · ¶ 19

Applying Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121, as reiterated in Pranay Sethi, the Court used a multiplier of 16.

p. 14 · ¶ 17

The Court distinguished the Tribunal’s reliance on Rajkumar v. Ajaykumar, IV (2010) 4 ACC 815 (SC), in light of Mohd. Sabeer.

pp. 9–11 · ¶ 9–11

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

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173

04Reasoning

The Court treated the claimant’s 14% whole-body disability, age and monthly income as established facts, and held that continued salary and subsequent increases did not, by themselves, defeat a claim for future loss of income where permanent disablement had resulted from the accident.

pp. 14–16 · ¶ 17–19

It calculated future loss by adding 50% future prospects to monthly income of Rs. 14,557, applying the 14% disability and multiplier of 16, arriving at Rs. 5,86,944.

p. 15 · ¶ 19

It also awarded Rs. 20,000 for pain, shock and suffering and Rs. 15,000 for special diet, attendant charges and transportation.

p. 16 · ¶ 20

As the claimant had continued receiving his salary, it declined to award compensation for actual loss of income.

pp. 16–17 · ¶ 20–21