Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.2931       OF 2011 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.2751/2011)

C. Mohanraju  ...Appellant(s)

- Versus -

Divisional Manager, United India, ...Respondent(s) Assurance Co. Ltd. and another

J U D G M E N T

GANGULY, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. On 2.09.2002, at about 2.30 pm, the appellant-

claimant  was  walking  on  the  Byatarayanapura  road  

near the bus stop, when the driver of a motorcycle  

(bearing no. KA-03-X-8591) came and dashed against  

the appellant, as a result of which the appellant  

sustained serious head injuries leading to weakness  

of his right hand and leg. The respondents are the  1

insurance company and the owner of the offending  

vehicle respectively.  

3. The  appellant  filed  a  claim  petition  under  

Section  166  of  the  Motor  Vehicles  Act,  1988,  

claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/-.

4. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), vide  

award dated 22.06.2006, concluded that the accident  

had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving  

of  the  motorcycle,  resulting  injuries  to  the  

appellant.  Though  the  doctor  had  assessed  

disability at 25% to the whole body, the Tribunal  

took it at 10%. The appellant was aged 35 years and  

was  involved  in  silk  winding.  He  claimed  to  be  

earning  Rs.4,500  per  month  but  there  was  no  

documentary  evidence  to  prove  his  income.  Hence,  

the Tribunal assessed it at Rs.50/- per day, which  

amounted to Rs.18,000/- annually and Rs.6,30,000/-  

during his whole life. As 10% loss was caused due  

to disability, the Tribunal held that the appellant  

2

was entitled to Rs.63,000/- towards loss of future  

income. The Tribunal also awarded Rs.20,000/- for  

pain and suffering, Rs.10,000/- for loss of future  

amenities,  Rs.1,200/-  for  medical  expenses,  

Rs.5,000/-  for  future  medical  treatment  and  

conveyance.   Accordingly,  total  compensation  was  

fixed at Rs.1,02,200/-, payable with interest @ 6%  

p.a. from the date of the claim petition till date  

of deposit by the insurance company on behalf of  

the owner of the offending vehicle.

5. Aggrieved by the compensation awarded by the  

Tribunal, the appellant appealed to the High Court  

of Karnataka at Bangalore. The High Court partly  

allowed  the  appeal  by  enhancing  the  compensation  

amount. It held that as the appellant was a silk  

weaver, he could not have been earning less than  

Rs.3,500/-  per  month.  Thus,  it  awarded  loss  of  

income  during  laid-up  period  as  Rs.10,500/-  

(Rs.3,500 X 3 months). The High Court calculated  

the disability of the whole body at 25%. It held  

3

that annual loss of income would be Rs. 10,500. As  

the  claimant  was  aged  34  years,  the  applicable  

multiplier would be 16. Thus, loss of future income  

was calculated at Rs.1,68,000/- (Rs.10,500 X 16).  

Considering the nature of injuries suffered by the  

appellant,  the  High  Court  also  enhanced  amount  

awarded for pain and suffering to Rs.35,000/-, for  

loss of amenities to Rs.50,000/-, for medical and  

allied expenses to Rs.10,000/-. Accordingly, total  

compensation amounted to Rs.2,78,500/- along with  

interest on the enhanced amount @ 6% p.a. from the  

date of the claim petition till date of payment.

6. Being still aggrieved by the judgment of the  

High Court, the appellant filed the present appeal  

claiming further enhancement of compensation.

7. Having  heard  the  parties  and  perused  the  

materials on record, we are of the opinion that the  

appeal deserves to be allowed.

4

8. The High Court, in calculating future loss of  

income, took the monthly income of the appellant to  

be Rs.3,500/-; thus annual income would amount to  

Rs.42,000/-.  Accordingly,  annual  income  of  

Rs.42,000/-  at  a  multiplier  of  16  amounts  to  

Rs.6,72,000/-. The next question for consideration  

is the percentage of disability.  

9. As per the doctor’s evidence, doctor assessed  

disability as hemiperesis right side at 40%, severe  

headache  10%,  blurring  of  vision  10%  and  recent  

loss  of  memory  at  10%.  He  assessed  25-30%  

disability of the whole body. The doctor also added  

that as a result of the disability, the appellant  

was incapable of doing silk winding work or any  

other manual work. It seems that there is severe  

weakness of the right hand and leg. The appellant  

is a silk winder, an occupation for which he needs  

to use his hands. Weakening of his right hand would  

adversely  affect  his  ability  to  perform  his  

occupation  as  he  had  been  doing  before  the  

5

accident. As a result, we assess the disability of  

the victim to earn in future at 30% as against 25%  

assessed by the High Court.

10. Thus,  loss  of  future  income  amounts  to  

Rs.2,01,600/-  (30%  of  Rs.6,72,000/-).  We  also  

enhance the compensation awarded for future medical  

expenses to Rs.10,000/-. The compensation awarded  

by  the  High  Court  under  the  remaining  heads  is  

sustained. Thus, it comes to  Rs.3,17,100/-, which  

we  round  off  to  Rs.3,20,000/-.  Interest  will  be  

payable on the enhanced amount at 6% from the date  

of the claim petition till date of realization.

11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.

12. No order as to costs.

.......................J. (G.S. SINGHVI)

.......................J. New Delhi (ASOK KUMAR GANGULY) April 04, 2011

6