The lorry insurer bears liability after an appellate finding fixes negligence on its insured driver.

The appellant was a pillion rider on a motorcycle involved in a collision with a lorry on 22 October 2012.

He sustained fractures to the left fibula, left pubic bone, and right radius and ulna, as well as loss of multiple teeth and an injury to his lower lip; his brother, who was riding the motorcycle, died.

The Tribunal awarded ₹4,87,500 but attributed the accident to the driver of a car and placed liability on the car’s owner.

The appellant challenged both the finding on liability and the amount of compensation.

In a separate appeal arising from the same accident, the High Court had held that the lorry driver was exclusively negligent.

Whether the Tribunal erred in fastening liability on the owner of the car, rather than the insurer of the lorry.

Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of disability and compensation was inadequate and required enhancement.

Under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, an aggrieved party may appeal a Tribunal’s award.

In assessing compensation for an injured claimant, Rajkumar v. Ajay Kumar requires consideration of the effect of disability on earning capacity; personal and living expenses are not deducted as they may be in a fatal-claim dependency calculation.

The Court also relied on the notional income applicable to the accident year and applied a 40% addition for future prospects, consistent with its decision in the related appeal.

Liability was determined with reference to the High Court’s prior finding in MFA No. 200561 of 2019 that the lorry driver’s negligence caused the accident.

On liability, the Court followed its unchallenged finding in the related appeal that the lorry driver was exclusively negligent; it therefore held that the Tribunal had no basis to place liability on the car’s owner and made the lorry’s insurer liable.

On quantum, the Tribunal had reduced the whole-body disability to 10% without adequately assessing the injuries and their functional consequences.

Having regard to the medical evidence and the doctor’s assessment, the Court fixed whole-body disability at 20%, while noting that the doctor had not assessed the pelvic injury or dental loss.

It assessed monthly income at ₹6,500, added 40% for future prospects, and applied multiplier 16 to calculate future loss of income at ₹3,49,440; it also enhanced other heads while maintaining the medical-expense award.

The Court modified the award, fixing total compensation at ₹8,31,940, inclusive of the Tribunal’s original award of ₹4,87,500, with interest at 6% per annum from the claim-petition date until realisation.

The car’s owner was exonerated, and the National Insurance Company, as insurer of the lorry, was directed to deposit the enhanced compensation within six weeks of receiving the certified judgment; deposit and release were left to the Tribunal’s order.