Tribunals must award liberal, fair, and realistic compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.

On 25 July 2015, the appellant–claimant was travelling in Rickshaw No. GJ-6-AV-598 when Rickshaw No. GJ-6-UU-3977, allegedly driven by Respondent No. 1 from the wrong side at excessive speed and negligently, collided with it.

The claimant sustained injuries and incurred expenses towards medical treatment, attendant charges, special diet and transportation. He claimed ₹5,00,000 as compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Godhra, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 856 of 2015, awarded ₹3,62,000 by judgment dated 31 August 2018.

Aggrieved by the allegedly inadequate assessment, the claimant filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of compensation.

At the appellate hearing, the claimant’s advocate had expired and no advocate appeared for the claimant despite service of notice; the Court therefore requested Mr. N.R. Bhalodi to assist it as amicus/pro bono counsel.

Whether the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was inadequate and required enhancement to constitute just and fair compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988?

Whether the claimant was entitled to enhanced compensation under the heads of future loss of income, actual loss of income, pain and suffering, medical expenses, and special diet, attendant charges and transportation?

The Court applied Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, governing appeals against awards of a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

It reiterated that the Motor Vehicles Act is beneficial legislation and that compensation must be “just and fair,” based on fairness, reasonableness, equity and realistic approximation of the loss suffered.

The Tribunal has a duty to award just compensation irrespective of the amount claimed, and the assessment should be liberal rather than niggardly, while remaining reasonable and equitable.

Compensation may be awarded under appropriate heads to provide monetary reparation for the claimant’s losses, although money cannot fully restore the physical and mental condition existing before the accident.

The High Court examined the Tribunal’s award and concluded that the compensation had not been properly assessed and was on the lower side.

Applying the principle of just and fair compensation, it reassessed the claimant’s entitlement at ₹6,33,960 for future loss of income, ₹54,000 for actual loss of income, ₹25,000 for pain, shock and suffering, ₹25,000 for medical expenses, and ₹15,000 for special diet, attendant charges and transportation.

The total compensation was therefore calculated at ₹7,52,960.

After deducting the ₹3,62,000 already awarded by the Tribunal, the Court determined that an additional amount of ₹3,90,960 was payable.

The Court accordingly enhanced the award with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until realization.

The Insurance Company was directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of ₹3,90,960 with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until realization before the concerned Tribunal within eight weeks of receiving the order.

The remaining directions of the Tribunal were affirmed.

The Tribunal was directed to disburse the entire awarded amount, including accrued interest, to the claimant through account-payee cheque, NEFT or RTGS after due verification and compliance with procedure, subject to deduction of court fees, if payable.