Chunni Lal V. Union of India and Others

FAO/4565/2006

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchkula. The original compensation was deemed insufficient by the appellant, Chunni Lal, who suffered severe injuries in a road accident involving a Maruti Zen car and a military truck. The accident was attributed to the rash and negligent driving of the truck driver, leading to multiple injuries for the occupants of the car and significant damage to the vehicle. The Tribunal initially awarded Rs. 1,30,000/- as compensation, which was contested in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The court, after considering the evidence, including the extent of injuries and permanent disability suffered by the appellant, enhanced the compensation significantly.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 816454 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 05-11-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and Another, R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Ltd., Baker v. Willoughby, C.K. Subramonia Iyer v. T. Kunhikuttan Nair, Arvind Kumar Mishra, National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors., Express Tran. Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors., Erudhaya Priya Vs. State, Dara Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Varma, R.Valli and Others VS. Tamil Nandu State Transport Corporation
• Laws Referred To: Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: PANKAJ GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: SAHEJ MAHAJAN
• Keywords: Enhancement of compensation; Motor Accident Claims Tribunal; Permanent disability; Rash and negligent driving
• Section: 166

Judgement Text

"FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) 221 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Chunni Lal Union of India and Others CORAM : HON’BLE Present: Mr. Sahej Mahajan Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate for the respondents. SUDEEPTI SHARMA 1. The present appeal has enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchkula Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, whereby, the claimant/appellant awarded a compensation of Rs. FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE 2. Brief facts of the case are that alongwith Ashok Kumar Suri, Rajpal Mahajan a Amritsar to Chandigarh by means of Maruti Zen Car bearing Registration No. PB-02H-5171 (hereinafter referred to as the car in question) being driven by Raj Singh. He was driving on hi about 10:00 AM, when they reached near village of Sahora, Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar, on Amirtsar (hereinafter referred to as the bus in qu 2006 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- FAO Date of Decision : VERSUS and Others CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Mr. Sahej Mahajan, Advocate for the appellant Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate for the respondents. -.- SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. (Oral) The present appeal has been preferred by the enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Panchkula (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, whereby, the claimant/appellant awarded a compensation of Rs.1,30,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE Brief facts of the case are that on 19.1 with Ashok Kumar Suri, Rajpal Mahajan a Amritsar to Chandigarh by means of Maruti Zen Car bearing Registration No. 5171 (hereinafter referred to as the car in question) being driven by Raj Singh. He was driving on his left hand side of the road at a moderate speed. At 00 AM, when they reached near village of Sahora, Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar, on Amirtsar-Chandigarh Road, a bus bearing registration No.PB (hereinafter referred to as the bus in question) being driven by Satnam Singh on his -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) Date of Decision : 05.11.2024 ....Appellant ....Respondents SUDEEPTI SHARMA , Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate for the respondents. been preferred by the claimant/appellant enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims ) vide award dated 11.05.2005 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, whereby, the claimant/appellant was along with interest @ 6% per annum. on 19.12.2001 Pawan Kumar Nayyar with Ashok Kumar Suri, Rajpal Mahajan and Chuni Lal was going from Amritsar to Chandigarh by means of Maruti Zen Car bearing Registration No. 5171 (hereinafter referred to as the car in question) being driven by Raj s left hand side of the road at a moderate speed. At 00 AM, when they reached near village of Sahora, Tehsil Kharar, District bearing registration No.PB-12-C-1798 estion) being driven by Satnam Singh on his for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims under was 2.2001 Pawan Kumar Nayyar d Chuni Lal was going from Amritsar to Chandigarh by means of Maruti Zen Car bearing Registration No. 5171 (hereinafter referred to as the car in question) being driven by Raj s left hand side of the road at a moderate speed. At 00 AM, when they reached near village of Sahora, Tehsil Kharar, District 1798 estion) being driven by Satnam Singh on his TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) left hand side of the road at a moderate speed came from opposite side. In the meantime, a Military truck, blue coloured, bearing registration No.90 (hereinafter referred to as the offending truck) being by respondent No.4 Naresh Kumar also came from opposite side i.e. from the side of Chandigarh. Ignoring all traffic rules, the offending truck tried to overtake the bus in rash and negligent manner despite seeing that the ca coming from the opposite space/distance to overtake the bus. In the process of overtaking, the offending truck came on the extreme wrong side of the road i.e. almost on the Kachcha berm and hit into the car of the in the pits by the side of the road. The driver of the offending truck tried to divert the truck again on its left side but due to the impact of the accident, the speed of the truck had reduced. The driver of the bus in question tried its best to avoid the accident, yet, the rear side of the offending truck struck against the right side of the bus. It was further alleged that the offending truck, after hitting the car in question had hit the bus in question as well. All the occupants of the car suffered multiple, simple and grievous injuries and the car was also badly damaged. The driver of the car namely Shri Raj Singh @ Raju and Ashok Kumar Suri to the injuries suffered by them. The bus was also damaged and some passengers suffered injuries. Hence account of rash and negligent driving of the offending truck by its driver. It was further alleged that t simple and grievous injuries including head injury and multiple fracture in the ribs etc. His right lung was badly ruptured with the rib bones. From the site of the 2006 (O&M) left hand side of the road at a moderate speed came from opposite side. In the meantime, a Military truck, blue coloured, bearing registration No.90 (hereinafter referred to as the offending truck) being by respondent No.4 Naresh Kumar also came from opposite side i.e. from the side of Chandigarh. Ignoring all traffic rules, the offending truck tried to overtake the bus in rash and negligent manner despite seeing that the ca coming from the opposite direction and there was no proper and sufficient space/distance to overtake the bus. In the process of overtaking, the offending truck came on the extreme wrong side of the road i.e. almost on the Kachcha berm d hit into the car of the appellants. As a result of conclusion the car was pushed in the pits by the side of the road. The driver of the offending truck tried to divert the truck again on its left side but due to the impact of the accident, the speed of the truck had reduced. The driver of the bus in question tried its best to avoid the accident, yet, the rear side of the offending truck struck against the right side of the It was further alleged that the offending truck, after hitting the car in question had hit the bus in question as well. All the occupants of the car suffered multiple, simple and grievous injuries and the car was also badly damaged. The driver of the car namely Shri Raj Singh @ Raju and Ashok Kumar Suri s suffered by them. The bus was also damaged and some passengers suffered injuries. Hence, it was submitted that the accident took place solely on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending truck by its driver. It was further alleged that the appellant simple and grievous injuries including head injury and multiple fracture in the ribs etc. His right lung was badly ruptured with the rib bones. From the site of the -2- left hand side of the road at a moderate speed came from opposite side. In the meantime, a Military truck, blue coloured, bearing registration No.90-E-63505 (hereinafter referred to as the offending truck) being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.4 Naresh Kumar also came from opposite side i.e. from the side of Chandigarh. Ignoring all traffic rules, the offending truck tried to overtake the bus in rash and negligent manner despite seeing that the car in question was direction and there was no proper and sufficient space/distance to overtake the bus. In the process of overtaking, the offending truck came on the extreme wrong side of the road i.e. almost on the Kachcha berm . As a result of conclusion the car was pushed in the pits by the side of the road. The driver of the offending truck tried to divert the truck again on its left side but due to the impact of the accident, the speed of the truck had reduced. The driver of the bus in question tried its best to avoid the accident, yet, the rear side of the offending truck struck against the right side of the It was further alleged that the offending truck, after hitting the car in question had hit the bus in question as well. All the occupants of the car suffered multiple, simple and grievous injuries and the car was also badly damaged. The driver of the car namely Shri Raj Singh @ Raju and Ashok Kumar Suri succumbed s suffered by them. The bus was also damaged and some passengers it was submitted that the accident took place solely on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending truck by its driver. he appellant Chuni Lal suffered multiple, simple and grievous injuries including head injury and multiple fracture in the ribs etc. His right lung was badly ruptured with the rib bones. From the site of the left hand side of the road at a moderate speed came from opposite side. In the 63505 rashly and negligently by respondent No.4 Naresh Kumar also came from opposite side i.e. from the side of Chandigarh. Ignoring all traffic rules, the offending truck tried to overtake the r in question was direction and there was no proper and sufficient space/distance to overtake the bus. In the process of overtaking, the offending truck came on the extreme wrong side of the road i.e. almost on the Kachcha berm . As a result of conclusion the car was pushed in the pits by the side of the road. The driver of the offending truck tried to divert the truck again on its left side but due to the impact of the accident, the speed of the truck had reduced. The driver of the bus in question tried its best to avoid the accident, yet, the rear side of the offending truck struck against the right side of the It was further alleged that the offending truck, after hitting the car in question had hit the bus in question as well. All the occupants of the car suffered multiple, simple and grievous injuries and the car was also badly damaged. The succumbed s suffered by them. The bus was also damaged and some passengers it was submitted that the accident took place solely on Chuni Lal suffered multiple, simple and grievous injuries including head injury and multiple fracture in the ribs etc. His right lung was badly ruptured with the rib bones. From the site of the TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) accident, the appellant was taken to Civil Hosp referred to PGI, Chandigarh. It was further submitted by him that his condition is still critical and he has already spent more than Rs.2,00,000/ transportation, visitors, special diet etc., Hence he filed 3. Upon the factum of accident 4. From the pleading issues:- 2006 (O&M) accident, the appellant was taken to Civil Hosp referred to PGI, Chandigarh. It was further submitted by him that his condition is still critical and he has already spent more than Rs.2,00,000/ transportation, visitors, special diet etc., Hence he filed Upon notice of the claim petition, accident/compensation. From the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following 1. Whether the accident in question had account of rash and negligent driving of Truck No.90 by respondent No.4 ? OPP 2. To what amount of compensation claimant Pawan Kumar Nayyar is entitled to on account of the injuries suffered by him in this accident and from whom? OPP 3. To what amount of compensation claimants Rajni Bala etc are entitled to on account of death of Raj Singh @ Raju in the present accident and from whom? OPP 4. To what amount of compensation claimant Chunni Lal is entitled to on account of the injuries s present accident and from whom? OPP 5. To what amount of compensation claimant Nirmal Kan etc are entitled to on account of death of Sh. Ashok Kumar Suri in the present accident and from whom? OPP -3- accident, the appellant was taken to Civil Hospital Kharar, from where he was referred to PGI, Chandigarh. It was further submitted by him that his condition is still critical and he has already spent more than Rs.2,00,000/- on his treatment, transportation, visitors, special diet etc., Hence he filed the claim petition. notice of the claim petition, respondents appeared and denied of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following Whether the accident in question had taken place on account of rash and negligent driving of Truck No.90-E-63505 To what amount of compensation claimant Pawan Kumar Nayyar is entitled to on account of the injuries suffered by him in this accident and from whom? OPP To what amount of compensation claimants Rajni Bala etc are entitled to on account of death of Raj Singh @ Raju in the present accident and from whom? OPP To what amount of compensation claimant Chunni Lal is entitled to on account of the injuries suffered by him in the present accident and from whom? OPP To what amount of compensation claimant Nirmal Kan etc are entitled to on account of death of Sh. Ashok Kumar Suri in the present accident and from whom? OPP ital Kharar, from where he was referred to PGI, Chandigarh. It was further submitted by him that his condition is on his treatment, respondents appeared and denied of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following taken place on 63505 To what amount of compensation claimant Pawan Kumar Nayyar is entitled to on account of the injuries suffered by him To what amount of compensation claimants Rajni Bala etc are entitled to on account of death of Raj Singh @ Raju in To what amount of compensation claimant Chunni Lal is uffered by him in the To what amount of compensation claimant Nirmal Kanta etc are entitled to on account of death of Sh. Ashok Kumar Suri TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) 5. After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal awarded alongwith interest @ 6% per annum. appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. SUBMISSIONS OF 6. Learned counsel assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side the Heads pain and amount has been awarded He further contends that the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the fact that appellant had suffered 25% permanent disability in regard to which disability certificate was annexed as Ex.P5/ allowed and the amount of compensation be enhanced. 7. Per contra, learned for the respondent the learned Tribunal vide award dated of compensation. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of this case 9. A perusal of the award indicates that attendant charges, transportation and special diet etc certificate (Ex.P5/1) shows 25% permanent disability qua both limbs. So far as 2006 (O&M) 6. To what amount of compensation Mahajan is entitled to on account of the injuries received by him in the present accident and from whom? OPP 7. Relief. After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. alongwith interest @ 6% per annum. Hence the claimant/appellant filed the present appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSELS Learned counsel for the claimant-appellant contends that assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side the Heads pain and suffering is also on the lower side. He further submits that no amount has been awarded for attendant charges, transportation and He further contends that the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the fact that appellant had suffered 25% permanent disability in regard to which disability certificate was annexed as Ex.P5/1. He, therefore allowed and the amount of compensation be enhanced. Per contra, learned for the respondent the learned Tribunal vide award dated 11.05.2005 of compensation. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the present appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of this case. A perusal of the award indicates that attendant charges, transportation and special diet etc certificate (Ex.P5/1) shows 25% permanent disability qua both limbs. So far as -4- To what amount of compensation claimant Raj Pal Mahajan is entitled to on account of the injuries received by him in the present accident and from whom? OPP After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on compensation to the tune of Rs.1,30,000/ Hence the claimant/appellant filed the present appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. COUNSELS FOR THE PARTIES appellant contends that the amount assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and amount assessed under is also on the lower side. He further submits that no for attendant charges, transportation and special diet He further contends that the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the fact that appellant had suffered 25% permanent disability in regard to which disability therefore, prays that the present appeal be allowed and the amount of compensation be enhanced. Per contra, learned for the respondent-Insurance Company argues that 11.05.2005 has rightly assessed the amount Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the present appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole A perusal of the award indicates that no amount has been awarded for attendant charges, transportation and special diet etc. Further, the disability certificate (Ex.P5/1) shows 25% permanent disability qua both limbs. So far as claimant Raj Pal Mahajan is entitled to on account of the injuries received by After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on ,000/- Hence the claimant/appellant filed the present amount and amount assessed under is also on the lower side. He further submits that no etc. He further contends that the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the fact that appellant had suffered 25% permanent disability in regard to which disability prays that the present appeal be that has rightly assessed the amount whole s been awarded for the disability certificate (Ex.P5/1) shows 25% permanent disability qua both limbs. So far as TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) income of the appellant is concerned, his income is shows as Rs.91,850/ were shown in the income tax return for the assessment year 2001 deducting the tax payable which is Rs.7,370/ comes out to be Rs.84,480/ assessed as Rs.7,0 enhanced amount of compensation, the record contains admission and expenses incurred for medical treatment and hospitalization. Consequently, this Court shall adjudicate the documented evidence on record. Therefore, the award requires inference by this Court. SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION 10. Hon’ble Supreme Court has settled the law regarding grant of compensation with respect to the disability. The Apex Court in the case of Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and Another (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases 343 held as under:- General principles relating 5. The provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for short) makes it clear that the award must be just, which means that compensation should, to the extent possible, fully and adequately restore the claimant to the position prior to the accident. The awarding damages is to make good the loss suffered as a result of wrong done as far as money can do so, in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The court or tribunal shall have to assess the damages objectively and exclude from consideration or fancy, though some conjecture with reference to the nature of 2006 (O&M) income of the appellant is concerned, his income is shows as Rs.91,850/ were shown in the income tax return for the assessment year 2001 deducting the tax payable which is Rs.7,370/- net annual income of the appellant comes out to be Rs.84,480/-. Therefore, the monthly income of the deceased is assessed as Rs.7,040 (Rs.84,480/12). Moreover, with respect to determination of enhanced amount of compensation, the record contains and expenses incurred for medical treatment and hospitalization. Consequently, this Court shall adjudicate the compensation, in accordance with the documented evidence on record. Therefore, the award requires inference by this ETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION Hon’ble Supreme Court has settled the law regarding grant of compensation with respect to the disability. The Apex Court in the case of Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and Another (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases 343 General principles relating to compensation in injury cases . The provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for short) makes it clear that the award must be just, which means that compensation should, to the extent possible, fully and adequately restore the claimant to the position prior to the accident. The awarding damages is to make good the loss suffered as a result of wrong done as far as money can do so, in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The court or tribunal shall have to assess the damages objectively and exclude from consideration or fancy, though some conjecture with reference to the nature of -5- income of the appellant is concerned, his income is shows as Rs.91,850/- which were shown in the income tax return for the assessment year 2001-2002. After net annual income of the appellant . Therefore, the monthly income of the deceased is Moreover, with respect to determination of enhanced amount of compensation, the record contains evidence of hospital and expenses incurred for medical treatment and hospitalization. compensation, in accordance with the documented evidence on record. Therefore, the award requires inference by this Hon’ble Supreme Court has settled the law regarding grant of compensation with respect to the disability. The Apex Court in the case of Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and Another (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases 343, has to compensation in injury cases . The provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for short) makes it clear that the award must be just, which means that compensation should, to the extent possible, fully and adequately restore the claimant to the position prior to the accident. The object of awarding damages is to make good the loss suffered as a result of wrong done as far as money can do so, in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The court or tribunal shall have to assess the damages objectively and exclude from consideration any speculation or fancy, though some conjecture with reference to the nature of which . After net annual income of the appellant . Therefore, the monthly income of the deceased is Moreover, with respect to determination of evidence of hospital and expenses incurred for medical treatment and hospitalization. compensation, in accordance with the documented evidence on record. Therefore, the award requires inference by this Hon’ble Supreme Court has settled the law regarding grant of Raj , has . The provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for short) makes it clear that the award must be just, which means that compensation should, to the extent possible, fully and adequately object of awarding damages is to make good the loss suffered as a result of wrong done as far as money can do so, in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The court or tribunal shall have to assess the any speculation or fancy, though some conjecture with reference to the nature of TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) disability and its consequences, is inevitable. A person is not only to be compensated for the physical injury, but also for the loss which he suffered as a result of such in compensated for his inability to lead a full life, his inability to enjoy those normal amenities which he would have enjoyed but for the injuries, and his inability to earn as much as have earned. 1970 Supreme Court 376, R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Ltd., 1995 (1) SCC 551 and Baker v. Willoughby, 1970 AC 467). 6. injury cases Pecuniary damages (Special Damages) (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure. (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising : (iii) Future medical expenses. Non Damages) (iv) Damages for pain, injuries. (v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage). (vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity). 2006 (O&M) disability and its consequences, is inevitable. A person is not only to be compensated for the physical injury, but also for the loss which he suffered as a result of such injury. This means that he is to be compensated for his inability to lead a full life, his inability to enjoy those normal amenities which he would have enjoyed but for the injuries, and his inability to earn as much as have earned. (See C.K. Subramonia Iyer v. T. Kunhikuttan Nair, AIR 1970 Supreme Court 376, R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Ltd., 1995 (1) SCC 551 and Baker v. Willoughby, 1970 AC 467). The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following : Pecuniary damages (Special Damages) (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure. (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising : (a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment; (b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability. (iii) Future medical expenses. Non Damages) (iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries. (v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage). (vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity). -6- disability and its consequences, is inevitable. A person is not only to be compensated for the physical injury, but also for the loss which he jury. This means that he is to be compensated for his inability to lead a full life, his inability to enjoy those normal amenities which he would have enjoyed but for the injuries, and his inability to earn as much as he used to earn or could (See C.K. Subramonia Iyer v. T. Kunhikuttan Nair, AIR 1970 Supreme Court 376, R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Ltd., 1995 (1) SCC 551 and Baker v. Willoughby, 1970 AC 467). The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal Pecuniary damages (Special Damages) (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure. (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising : (a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment; (b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability. (iii) Future medical expenses. Non-pecuniary damages (General suffering and trauma as a consequence of the (v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage). (vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity). disability and its consequences, is inevitable. A person is not only to be compensated for the physical injury, but also for the loss which he jury. This means that he is to be compensated for his inability to lead a full life, his inability to enjoy those normal amenities which he would have enjoyed but for the he used to earn or could (See C.K. Subramonia Iyer v. T. Kunhikuttan Nair, AIR 1970 Supreme Court 376, R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have (b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability. pecuniary damages (General suffering and trauma as a consequence of the TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded only under heads (i), (ii)(a) and (iv). It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant, that compensation will be granted under any of the heads (ii)(b), (iii), (v) and (vi) relating to account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of expectation of life. 19. We may now summarise the principles discussed above : (i) All injuries (or permanent disabilities arising from injuries), do not result in loss of earning capacity. (ii) The percentage of permanent disability with reference to the whole body of a person, cannot be assumed to be the percentage of loss of earn earning capacity is not the same as the percentage of permanent disability (except in a few cases, where the Tribunal on the basis of evidence, concludes that percentage of loss of earning capa same as percentage of permanent disability). (iii) The doctor who treated an injured subsequently to assess the extent of his permanent disability can give evidence only in regard the extent of permanent disability earning capacity is something that will have to be assessed by the Tribunal with reference to the evidence in entirety. 2006 (O&M) In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded only nder heads (i), (ii)(a) and (iv). It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant, that compensation will be granted under any of the heads (ii)(b), (iii), (v) and (vi) relating to account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of expectation of life. xxx xxx 19. We may now summarise the principles discussed above : (i) All injuries (or permanent disabilities arising from injuries), do not result in loss of earning capacity. (ii) The percentage of permanent disability with reference to the whole body of a person, cannot be assumed to be the percentage of loss of earning capacity. To put it differently, the percentage of loss of earning capacity is not the same as the percentage of permanent disability (except in a few cases, where the Tribunal on the basis of evidence, concludes that percentage of loss of earning capa same as percentage of permanent disability). (iii) The doctor who treated an injured subsequently to assess the extent of his permanent disability can give evidence only in regard the extent of permanent disability earning capacity is something that will have to be assessed by the Tribunal with reference to the evidence in entirety. -7- In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded only nder heads (i), (ii)(a) and (iv). It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant, that compensation will be granted under any of the heads (ii)(b), (iii), (v) and (vi) relating to loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of xxx xxx 19. We may now summarise the principles discussed above : (i) All injuries (or permanent disabilities arising from injuries), do not (ii) The percentage of permanent disability with reference to the whole body of a person, cannot be assumed to be the percentage of ing capacity. To put it differently, the percentage of loss of earning capacity is not the same as the percentage of permanent disability (except in a few cases, where the Tribunal on the basis of evidence, concludes that percentage of loss of earning capacity is the same as percentage of permanent disability). (iii) The doctor who treated an injured-claimant or who examined him subsequently to assess the extent of his permanent disability can give evidence only in regard the extent of permanent disability. The loss of earning capacity is something that will have to be assessed by the Tribunal with reference to the evidence in entirety. In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded only nder heads (i), (ii)(a) and (iv). It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant, that compensation will be granted under any of the loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of (i) All injuries (or permanent disabilities arising from injuries), do not (ii) The percentage of permanent disability with reference to the whole body of a person, cannot be assumed to be the percentage of ing capacity. To put it differently, the percentage of loss of earning capacity is not the same as the percentage of permanent disability (except in a few cases, where the Tribunal on the basis of city is the claimant or who examined him subsequently to assess the extent of his permanent disability can give . The loss of earning capacity is something that will have to be assessed by the TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) (iv) The same permanent disability may result in different percentages of loss of earning capacity in different persons, nature of profession, occupation or job, age, education and other factors. 20. The assessment of loss of future earnings is explained below with reference to the following Illustration 'A' earning Rs. 3000/ evidence, the permanent disability of the limb as a consequence of the injury was 60% and the consequential permanent disability to the person was quantified at 30%. The loss of earnin however assessed by the Tribunal as 15% on the basis of evidence, because the claimant is continued in employment, but in a lower grade. Calculation of compensation will be as follows: Illustration 'B' 3000/ is assessed at 60%. He was terminated from his job as he could no longer drive. His chances of getting any other employment was bleak and even if he got any job, the salary 2006 (O&M) (iv) The same permanent disability may result in different percentages of loss of earning capacity in different persons, nature of profession, occupation or job, age, education and other factors. 20. The assessment of loss of future earnings is explained below with reference to the following Illustration 'A' : The injured, a workman, was aged 30 years an earning Rs. 3000/- per month at the time of accident. As per Doctor's evidence, the permanent disability of the limb as a consequence of the injury was 60% and the consequential permanent disability to the person was quantified at 30%. The loss of earnin however assessed by the Tribunal as 15% on the basis of evidence, because the claimant is continued in employment, but in a lower grade. Calculation of compensation will be as follows: a) Annual income before the accident : Rs. 36,000/ b) Loss of future earning per annum (15% of the prior annual income) : c) Multiplier applicable with reference to age : 17 d) Loss of future earnings : (5400 x 17) : Illustration 'B' : The injured was a driver aged 30 years 3000/- per month. His hand is amputated and his permanent disability is assessed at 60%. He was terminated from his job as he could no longer drive. His chances of getting any other employment was bleak and even if he got any job, the salary -8- (iv) The same permanent disability may result in different percentages of loss of earning capacity in different persons, depending upon the nature of profession, occupation or job, age, education and other 20. The assessment of loss of future earnings is explained below : The injured, a workman, was aged 30 years an per month at the time of accident. As per Doctor's evidence, the permanent disability of the limb as a consequence of the injury was 60% and the consequential permanent disability to the person was quantified at 30%. The loss of earning capacity is however assessed by the Tribunal as 15% on the basis of evidence, because the claimant is continued in employment, but in a lower grade. Calculation of compensation will be as follows: a) Annual income before the accident : Rs. 36,000/-. b) Loss of future earning per annum (15% of the prior annual income) : Rs. 5400/-. c) Multiplier applicable with reference to age : 17 d) Loss of future earnings : (5400 x 17) : Rs. 91,800/- : The injured was a driver aged 30 years, earning Rs. per month. His hand is amputated and his permanent disability is assessed at 60%. He was terminated from his job as he could no longer drive. His chances of getting any other employment was bleak and even if he got any job, the salary was likely to be a pittance. The (iv) The same permanent disability may result in different percentages depending upon the nature of profession, occupation or job, age, education and other 20. The assessment of loss of future earnings is explained below : The injured, a workman, was aged 30 years and per month at the time of accident. As per Doctor's evidence, the permanent disability of the limb as a consequence of the injury was 60% and the consequential permanent disability to the g capacity is however assessed by the Tribunal as 15% on the basis of evidence, because the claimant is continued in employment, but in a lower , earning Rs. per month. His hand is amputated and his permanent disability is assessed at 60%. He was terminated from his job as he could no longer drive. His chances of getting any other employment was bleak was likely to be a pittance. The TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) Tribunal therefore assessed his loss of future earning capacity as 75%. Calculation of compensation will be as follows : Illustration 'C' Engineering student. As a result of th two months, his right hand was amputated and vision was affected. The permanent disablement was assessed as 70%. As the injured was incapacitated to pursue his chosen career and as he required the assistance of a servant thro capacity was also assessed as 70%. The calculation of compensation will be as follows : a) Minimum annual income he would have got if had been employed as an Engineer b) Loss of future ea (70% of the expected annual income) c) Multiplier applicable (25 years) d) Loss of future earnings : (42000 x 18) [Note : The figures adopted in illustrations (A) and (B) are hypothetical. actuals taken from the decision in Arvind Kumar Mishra (supra)]. 11. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. 2006 (O&M) Tribunal therefore assessed his loss of future earning capacity as 75%. Calculation of compensation will be as follows : a) Annual income prior to the accident : Rs. 36,000/ b) Loss of future earning per annum (75% of the prior annual income) c) Multiplier applicable with reference to age : 17 d) Loss of future earnings : (27000 x 17) : Rs. 4,59,000/ Illustration 'C' : The injured was 25 years and a final year Engineering student. As a result of th two months, his right hand was amputated and vision was affected. The permanent disablement was assessed as 70%. As the injured was incapacitated to pursue his chosen career and as he required the assistance of a servant throughout his life, the loss of future earning capacity was also assessed as 70%. The calculation of compensation will be as follows : a) Minimum annual income he would have got if had been employed as an Engineer b) Loss of future earning per annum (70% of the expected annual income) c) Multiplier applicable (25 years) d) Loss of future earnings : (42000 x 18) [Note : The figures adopted in illustrations (A) and (B) are hypothetical. The figures in Illustration (C) however are based on actuals taken from the decision in Arvind Kumar Mishra (supra)]. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680] -9- Tribunal therefore assessed his loss of future earning capacity as 75%. Calculation of compensation will be as follows : a) Annual income prior to the accident : Rs. 36,000/- . b) Loss of future earning per annum the prior annual income) : Rs. 27000/-. c) Multiplier applicable with reference to age : 17 d) Loss of future earnings : (27000 x 17) : Rs. 4,59,000/- : The injured was 25 years and a final year Engineering student. As a result of the accident, he was in coma for two months, his right hand was amputated and vision was affected. The permanent disablement was assessed as 70%. As the injured was incapacitated to pursue his chosen career and as he required the ughout his life, the loss of future earning capacity was also assessed as 70%. The calculation of compensation a) Minimum annual income he would have got if had been employed as an : Rs. 60,000/- rning per annum (70% of the expected annual income) : Rs. 42000/- c) Multiplier applicable (25 years) : 18 d) Loss of future earnings : (42000 x 18) : Rs. 7,56,000/- [Note : The figures adopted in illustrations (A) and (B) are The figures in Illustration (C) however are based on actuals taken from the decision in Arvind Kumar Mishra (supra)]. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company [(2017) 16 SCC 680] has clarified the law under Tribunal therefore assessed his loss of future earning capacity as : The injured was 25 years and a final year e accident, he was in coma for two months, his right hand was amputated and vision was affected. The permanent disablement was assessed as 70%. As the injured was incapacitated to pursue his chosen career and as he required the ughout his life, the loss of future earning capacity was also assessed as 70%. The calculation of compensation [Note : The figures adopted in illustrations (A) and (B) are The figures in Illustration (C) however are based on National Insurance Company aw under TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) Sections 166, 163 aspects:- (A) multiplicand; (B) (C) (D) estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses, with escalation; (E) ages: with permanent job; self The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced as under: 12. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Express Tran. Corpn. Ltd. 2006 (O&M) Sections 166, 163-A and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, on the following (A) Deduction of personal and living expenses to determine multiplicand; (B) Selection of multiplier depending on age of deceased; (C) Age of deceased on basis for applying multiplier; (D) Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses, with escalation; (E) Future prospects for all categories of persons and for different ages: with permanent job; self-employed or fixed salary. The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced as under: “ Therefore, we think it seemly to fix reasonable sums. It seems to us that reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and fune should be Rs.15,000, Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 respectively. The principle of revisiting the said heads is an acceptable principle. But the revisit should not be fact centric. We think that it would be condign that the amoun we have quantified should be enhanced on percentage basis in every three years and the enhancement should be at the rate of 10% in a span of three years. We are disposed to hold so because that will bring in consistency in respect of those heads.” Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Express Tran. Corpn. Ltd. 2020 ACJ 2159, has held as under: -10- A and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, on the following Deduction of personal and living expenses to determine Selection of multiplier depending on age of deceased; for applying multiplier; Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses, with escalation; Future prospects for all categories of persons and for different ployed or fixed salary. The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced as under:- Therefore, we think it seemly to fix reasonable sums. It seems to us that reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs.15,000, Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 respectively. The principle of revisiting the said heads is an acceptable principle. But the revisit should not be fact-centric or quantum centric. We think that it would be condign that the amount that we have quantified should be enhanced on percentage basis in every three years and the enhancement should be at the rate of 10% in a span of three years. We are disposed to hold so because that will bring in consistency in respect of those Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Erudhaya Priya Vs. State has held as under:- A and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, on the following Deduction of personal and living expenses to determine Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of Future prospects for all categories of persons and for different Therefore, we think it seemly to fix reasonable sums. It seems to us that reasonable figures on conventional heads, ral expenses should be Rs.15,000, Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 respectively. The principle of revisiting the said heads is an acceptable centric or quantum- t that we have quantified should be enhanced on percentage basis in every three years and the enhancement should be at the rate of 10% in a span of three years. We are disposed to hold so because that will bring in consistency in respect of those Erudhaya Priya Vs. State TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) “ 7. There are three aspects which are required to be examined by us: (a) the application of multiplier of '17' instead of age of the appellant as 23 years relying on the judgment in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and 2700 (SC) effectively affirmed the multiplier method to be used as mentioned in the table in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, group of 15 factoring in the extent of disability. for the respondent State Corporation and, thus, we come to the conclusion that the multiplier to be applied in the case of the appellant has to be '18' and not '17'. (b) Loss of earning capa disability of 31.1% compensation on what is stated to be the settled principle set out in Jagdish v. Mohan & Others, Khanuja below the principle set out in the Jagdish (supra) in para 8: 2006 (O&M) 7. There are three aspects which are required to be examined by us: (a) the application of multiplier of '17' instead of The aforesaid increase of multiplier is sought on the basis of age of the appellant as 23 years relying on the judgment in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and 2700 (SC). In para 46 of the said judgment, the Consti effectively affirmed the multiplier method to be used as mentioned in the table in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, group of 15-25 years, the multiplier has to factoring in the extent of disability. The aforesaid position is not really disputed by learned counsel for the respondent State Corporation and, thus, we come to the conclusion that the multiplier to be applied in the case of the appellant has to be '18' and not '17'. (b) Loss of earning capacity of the appellant with permanent disability of 31.1% In respect of the aforesaid, the appellant has claimed compensation on what is stated to be the settled principle set out in Jagdish v. Mohan & Others, 2018 ACJ 1011 (SC) Khanuja v. Atul Dande & Another, below the principle set out in the Jagdish (supra) in para 8: \"8. In assessing the compensation payable the settled principles need to be borne in mind. A victim who suffers a permanent or temporary disability occasioned by an accident is entitled to the -11- 7. There are three aspects which are required to be examined by us: (a) the application of multiplier of '17' instead of '18'; The aforesaid increase of multiplier is sought on the basis of age of the appellant as 23 years relying on the judgment in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Others, 2017 ACJ of the said judgment, the Constitution Bench effectively affirmed the multiplier method to be used as mentioned in the table in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, 2009 ACJ 1298 (SC) . In the age 25 years, the multiplier has to be '18' along with factoring in the extent of disability. The aforesaid position is not really disputed by learned counsel for the respondent State Corporation and, thus, we come to the conclusion that the multiplier to be applied in the case of the appellant has to be '18' and not '17'. city of the appellant with permanent In respect of the aforesaid, the appellant has claimed compensation on what is stated to be the settled principle set out in 2018 ACJ 1011 (SC) and Sandeep v. Atul Dande & Another, 2017 ACJ 979 (SC). We extract below the principle set out in the Jagdish (supra) in para 8: \"8. In assessing the compensation payable the settled principles need to be borne in mind. A victim who suffers a permanent or disability occasioned by an accident is entitled to the 7. There are three aspects which are required to be examined by us: The aforesaid increase of multiplier is sought on the basis of age of the appellant as 23 years relying on the judgment in National Others, 2017 ACJ tution Bench effectively affirmed the multiplier method to be used as mentioned in the table in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others v. Delhi . In the age be '18' along with The aforesaid position is not really disputed by learned counsel for the respondent State Corporation and, thus, we come to the conclusion that the multiplier to be applied in the case of the city of the appellant with permanent In respect of the aforesaid, the appellant has claimed compensation on what is stated to be the settled principle set out in and Sandeep We extract \"8. In assessing the compensation payable the settled principles need to be borne in mind. A victim who suffers a permanent or disability occasioned by an accident is entitled to the TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) judgment, i.e. the Sandeep Khanuja case (supra) opining that the multiplier method was logically sound and legally well established to quantify the loss of income as a result of death or permanent disability suffered in an acc disability certificate, it shows the admission/hospitalization on 8 occasions for various number of days over 1½ years from August 2011 to January 2013. The nature of injuries had been under: 2006 (O&M) award of compensation. The award of compensation must cover among others, the following aspects: (i) Pain, suffering and trauma resulting from the accident; (ii) Loss of income including future income; (iii) The inability of the victim to lead a normal life together with its amenities; (iv) Medical expenses including those that the victim may be required to undertake in future; and (v) Loss of expectation of life.\" The aforesaid principle has also judgment, i.e. the Sandeep Khanuja case (supra) opining that the multiplier method was logically sound and legally well established to quantify the loss of income as a result of death or permanent disability suffered in an accident. In the factual contours of the present case, if we examine the disability certificate, it shows the admission/hospitalization on 8 occasions for various number of days over 1½ years from August 2011 to January 2013. The nature of injuries had been under: \"Nature of injury: (i) compound fracture shaft left humerus (ii) fracture both bones left forearm (iii) compound fracture both bones right forearm (iv) fracture 3rd, 4th & 5th metacarpals right hand -12- award of compensation. The award of compensation must cover among others, the following aspects: Pain, suffering and trauma resulting from the accident; Loss of income including future income; inability of the victim to lead a normal life together Medical expenses including those that the victim may be required to undertake in future; and Loss of expectation of life.\" [emphasis supplied] The aforesaid principle has also been emphasized in an earlier judgment, i.e. the Sandeep Khanuja case (supra) opining that the multiplier method was logically sound and legally well established to quantify the loss of income as a result of death or permanent In the factual contours of the present case, if we examine the disability certificate, it shows the admission/hospitalization on 8 occasions for various number of days over 1½ years from August 2011 to January 2013. The nature of injuries had been set out as compound fracture shaft left humerus fracture both bones left forearm compound fracture both bones right forearm fracture 3rd, 4th & 5th metacarpals right hand award of compensation. The award of compensation must cover Pain, suffering and trauma resulting from the accident; inability of the victim to lead a normal life together Medical expenses including those that the victim may be been emphasized in an earlier judgment, i.e. the Sandeep Khanuja case (supra) opining that the multiplier method was logically sound and legally well established to quantify the loss of income as a result of death or permanent In the factual contours of the present case, if we examine the disability certificate, it shows the admission/hospitalization on 8 occasions for various number of days over 1½ years from August set out as TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) 2006 (O&M) (v) subtrochanteric fracture right femur (vi) fracture shaft femur (vii) fracture both bones left leg We have also perused the photographs annexed to the petition showing the current physical state of the appellant, though it is stated by learned counsel for the respondent State Corporation that the same was not on recor Be that as it may, this is the position even after treatment and the nature of injuries itself show their extent. Furthe been opined in para 13 of Sandeep Khanuja case (supra) that while applying the multiplier method, future advancement in life and career are also to be taken into consideration. We are, thus, unequivocally of the view that there is merit in the contention of the appellant and the aforesaid principles with regard to future prospects must also be of the appellant taking the permanent disability as 31.1%. The quantification of the same on the basis of the judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd. case (supra), more specifically para 61(iii), considering the age of the appellant, wo 50% of the actual salary in the present case. (c) The third and the last aspect is the interest rate claimed as 12% In respect of the aforesaid, the appellant has watered down the interest rate during the course of hearing to 9% in -13- subtrochanteric fracture right femur fracture both bones left leg We have also perused the photographs annexed to the petition showing the current physical state of the appellant, though it is stated by learned counsel for the respondent State Corporation that the same was not on record in the trial court. Be that as it may, this is the position even after treatment and the nature of injuries itself show their extent. Further, it has of Sandeep Khanuja case (supra) that while applying the multiplier method, future prospects on advancement in life and career are also to be taken into We are, thus, unequivocally of the view that there is merit in the contention of the appellant and the aforesaid principles with regard to future prospects must also be applied in the case of the appellant taking the permanent disability as 31.1%. The quantification of the same on the basis of the judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd. case (supra), more specifically , considering the age of the appellant, would be 50% of the actual salary in the present case. (c) The third and the last aspect is the interest rate claimed as In respect of the aforesaid, the appellant has watered down the interest rate during the course of hearing to 9% in We have also perused the photographs annexed to the petition showing the current physical state of the appellant, though it is stated by learned counsel for the respondent State d in the trial court. Be that as it may, this is the position even after treatment and r, it has of Sandeep Khanuja case (supra) that prospects on advancement in life and career are also to be taken into We are, thus, unequivocally of the view that there is merit in the contention of the appellant and the aforesaid principles applied in the case of the appellant taking the permanent disability as 31.1%. The quantification of the same on the basis of the judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd. case (supra), more specifically uld be (c) The third and the last aspect is the interest rate claimed as In respect of the aforesaid, the appellant has watered down the interest rate during the course of hearing to 9% in TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) Rs. per annum from the date of application till the date of payment. 2006 (O&M) view of the judicial pronouncements including in the Jagdish case (supra). On this aspect, once again, there was no serious dispute raised by the learned counsel for the respondent once the claim was confined to 9% in line with the interest rates applied by this Court. CONCLUSION 8. The result of the aforesaid is that relying on the settled principles, the calculation of compensation by the appellant, as set out in para 5 of the synopsis, would have to be adopted as follows: Heads Loss of earning power (Rs.14,648 x 12 x 31.1/100 Future prospects (50 per cent addition) Medical expenses including transport charges, nourishment, etc. Loss of matrimonial prospects Loss of comfort, loss of amenities and mental agony Pain and suffering Total The appellant would, thus, be entitled to the compensation of Rs. 41,69,831/- as claimed along with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till the date of payment. -14- icial pronouncements including in the Jagdish case (supra). On this aspect, once again, there was no serious dispute raised by the learned counsel for the respondent once the claim was confined to 9% in line with the interest rates 8. The result of the aforesaid is that relying on the settled principles, the calculation of compensation by the appellant, as set out in para 5 of the synopsis, would have to be adopted as Awarded Rs. 9,81,978/- Rs.4,90,989/- Rs.18,46,864/- Rs.5,00,000/- Rs.1,50,000/- Rs.2,00,000/- Rs.41,69,831/- The appellant would, thus, be entitled to the compensation of as claimed along with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till the date of payment. icial pronouncements including in the Jagdish’s case (supra). On this aspect, once again, there was no serious dispute raised by the learned counsel for the respondent once the claim was confined to 9% in line with the interest rates 8. The result of the aforesaid is that relying on the settled principles, the calculation of compensation by the appellant, as set out in para 5 of the synopsis, would have to be adopted as The appellant would, thus, be entitled to the compensation of as claimed along with simple interest at the rate of 9% TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) CONCLUSION 13. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above referred to judgments, the present appeal is allowed. The award dated 11.05.2005 is modified accordingly. The appellant enhanced amount of compensation as pe Sr. No. 1 Income 2 Annual Income 3 Loss of future earning per annum (25%) 4 Multiplier 5 Pain and sufferings 6 Special Diet 7 Medical expenses 8 Transportation charges 9 Attendant Charges 10 Loss of Amenities of life Total Compensation Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Enhanced Compensation 14. So far as the interest part is concerned, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dara Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Varma and R.Valli and Others VS. Tamil Nandu State Transport Corporation Supreme Court Cases 107, per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of realization 15. Respondent Nos. of compensation 2006 (O&M) CONCLUSION In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above referred to judgments, the present appeal is allowed. The award dated is modified accordingly. The appellant enhanced amount of compensation as per the calculations made here Heads Income Rs.7,040/ Annual Income Rs.84,480/ Loss of future earning per annum (25%) Rs.21,120/ Multiplier (7) Rs.1,47,840/ Pain and sufferings Rs.1,00,000/ Special Diet Rs. Medical expenses Rs. Transportation charges Rs. Attendant Charges Rs. Loss of Amenities of life Rs.75,000/ Total Compensation Rs. Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs.1, Enhanced Compensation Rs. So far as the interest part is concerned, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Dara Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Varma R.Valli and Others VS. Tamil Nandu State Transport Corporation Supreme Court Cases 107, the amount so calculated shall carry an interest @ per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of realization Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 are directed to deposit the of compensation along with interest with the Tribunal -15- In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above referred to judgments, the present appeal is allowed. The award dated is modified accordingly. The appellant-claimant is entitled to the r the calculations made here-under:- Compensation Awarded Rs.7,040/- Rs.84,480/- Rs.21,120/- Rs.1,47,840/- (21,120 x 7) Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.30,000/- Rs.78,114/- Rs.25,000/- Rs.50,000/- Rs.75,000/- Rs.5,05,954/- Rs.1,30,000/- Rs.3,75,954/- So far as the interest part is concerned, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Dara Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 3176 R.Valli and Others VS. Tamil Nandu State Transport Corporation (2022) 5 so calculated shall carry an interest @ per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of realization. directed to deposit the enhanced amount along with interest with the Tribunal (jointly and severally) within In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above referred to judgments, the present appeal is allowed. The award dated claimant is entitled to the So far as the interest part is concerned, as held by Hon’ble Supreme 2019 ACJ 3176 (2022) 5 9% amount within TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-4565-2006 (O&M) a period of two months The Tribunal is further directed to interest in the account furnish his bank account details to the Tribunal. 16. FAO is 17. Pending applications, if any, November 05, 2024 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable 2006 (O&M) a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this The Tribunal is further directed to disburse the amount of compensation along with in the account of claimant/appellant. The claimant bank account details to the Tribunal. FAO is Disposed of accordingly. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. , 2024 Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -16- from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment disburse the amount of compensation along with of claimant/appellant. The claimant/appellant is directed to bank account details to the Tribunal. also stand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE speaking : Speaking es/No judgment. disburse the amount of compensation along with directed to TRIPTI SAINI 2024.11.21 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "