Same Job, Same Salary, 13% Whole-Body Disability: Karnataka HC Awards Worker Rs 74,880 For Job-Market Handicap

The claimant sustained an open fracture of both bones of his left forearm in a road accident on 30 January 2023.

The MACT awarded him ₹70,525, including ₹24,000 for medical expenses, but excluded ₹1,43,234 reimbursed under his employer’s health-insurance policy and did not award compensation for permanent disability because he had continued working at the same salary.

The claimant appealed for enhancement, relying, among other things, on his 13% whole-body disability, the reimbursed medical expenses, and the need for surgery to remove an implant.

Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal against a MACT award.

Under the principles applied in Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar, compensation for disability must address its effect on earning capacity.

Relying on Dr. Yashwanth Dongre v. Salman Rasheed, the Court applied the principle that continued employment and unchanged salary do not necessarily eliminate compensation for diminished earning capacity or labour-market disadvantage; a suitable amount may be awarded for handicap in the employment market.

Applying New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Dolly Satish Gandhi, the Court held that medical expenses reimbursed under a health-insurance policy should not, on that ground alone, be disallowed.

The Court distinguished Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Priyanka Das, noting that its exceptional facts and express limitation meant it was not to be treated as a precedent for the present case.

The claimant was 32 years old, attracting a multiplier of 16, and the medical evidence established 13% whole-body disability.

Although he remained employed at the same salary, the Court found that his permanent disability placed him at a disadvantage in the labour market.

It therefore calculated loss of income by applying 13% disability to his monthly income of ₹30,000 and the multiplier of 16, resulting in ₹7,48,800, and awarded a further ₹74,880—10% of that amount—for reduced employment eligibility or labour-market handicap.

Following Dolly Satish Gandhi, it included the ₹1,43,234 reimbursed medical expense in addition to the ₹24,000 already awarded.

It also enhanced compensation for pain and suffering, amenities, and one month’s lost income, and awarded ₹30,000 for future implant-removal expenses, without interest on that future expense.

The Court fixed total compensation at ₹4,52,114, enhancing the MACT award by ₹3,81,589, with interest at 6% per annum from the petition date until realization, except on the ₹30,000 awarded for future medical expenses.

The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced amount within six weeks.

The claimant was permitted to withdraw 50% of the enhanced compensation; the balance was to be placed in a three-year fixed deposit in his name.