Case Note & Summary
The matter concerned an appeal by the United India Insurance Company Limited against the judgment and award dated 17.12.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South Goa, in Claim Petition No.21 of 2013. The claimant, Kimberlyn Joanna Stephanie Pereira, was an 18-year-old student who sustained severe injuries in a road accident on 17.09.2010 when a rashly driven Tata truck bearing registration No. KA-22/B-9899 dashed the Wagon-R car in which she was travelling with family members near Mangenkoppa, Belgaum, Karnataka. The accident resulted in the death of two family members and left Kimberlyn with 91.5% certified disabilities, described by medical evidence as a vegetable state. She remained in a coma for three months, required feeding through a Rylee's tube for ten months, and became bedridden, unable to walk independently, with slurred speech and memory loss. Her mother, Andreza R. Pereira, acted as her next friend and deposed that she had no marital prospects and her future was in total darkness. The Tribunal awarded compensation under various heads, including Rs.16,20,000 for dependency by adding 50% future prospects, Rs.3,00,000 for future medical expenses, Rs.3,00,000 for attendant fees, Rs.4,00,000 for loss of amenities and marriage prospects, Rs.5,00,000 for loss of expectations in life, Rs.3,00,000 for pain and suffering, and Rs.2,52,600 to the mother for staying at home on leave to attend to the claimant. The insurance company filed the appeal with a delay of 246 days and sought condonation, blaming its advocate for not informing the head office about the award. The court found the reasons uninspiring but condoned the delay, noting that prolonging the matter on this count would further delay the cause of the severely injured claimant. Notices were issued on 02.05.2018, but almost four years were spent serving respondents, and the driver and owner were deleted from the cause title on 28.08.2019. Execution was stayed subject to deposit, and the claimant was permitted to withdraw 50% of the awarded amount by order dated 29.04.2019. On merits, the appellant argued that the dependency compensation was contrary to National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi because the Tribunal added 50% future prospects instead of 40%; the future medical expenses and attendant fees were excessive; the heads of loss of amenities and loss of expectations overlapped; and the pain and suffering award was excessive. The respondent defended the award and sought enhancement, emphasizing the claimant's permanent vegetable state and total dependence. The court heard both sides, called for records, and reserved order to assess the record entirely. The provided judgment text ends before the final determination on quantum, but it is clear that the delay was condoned and the appeal was taken up for final disposal on merits.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Condonation of Delay - Delay of 246 Days in Filing Appeal Condoned Despite Uninspiring Reasons - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The insurance company sought condonation of 246 days delay in instituting an appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award dated 17.12.2016; the reasons stated were uninspiring, blaming the advocate without affidavit or proof of follow-up; the court condoned the delay because it was not worthwhile to prolong the matter further on this count and proceeded to hear the appeal on merits - Held that delay is condoned and Misc. Civil Application No.369 of 2018 is disposed of (Paras 2-6). B) Motor Accident Compensation - Loss of Future Prospects - Addition to Notional Income for Deceased Cannot Exceed 40% - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The appellant argued that the Tribunal added 50% to the notional income of the deceased, contrary to National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi where the addition could be only 40%, making the dependency compensation of Rs.16,20,000 excessive; the respondent defended the award and sought enhancement due to the claimant's vegetable state - The court reserved order to assess the record entirely; no final determination on this issue is available in the provided text (Paras 7-10). C) Motor Accident Compensation - Future Medical Expenses - Award of Rs.3,00,000 for Future Medical Expenses Alleged High - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The appellant contended that the award of Rs.3,00,000 towards future medical expenses was relatively high and must be scaled down; the respondent pointed out that the claimant was reduced to a vegetable state requiring continuous medical care - The court examined the rival contentions and reserved order; no final decision on this head is available in the provided text (Paras 7-8, 11-13). D) Motor Accident Compensation - Attendant Fees and Overlapping Claims - Attendant Fees of Rs.3,00,000 and Mother's Leave Salary of Rs.2,52,600 Overlap - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The appellant argued that the attendant fees award was improper because the claimant's mother was already awarded Rs.2,52,600 for staying at home on leave without pay to attend to the claimant; the appellant also argued that the heads of loss of amenities & marriage prospects (Rs.4,00,000) and loss of expectations in life (Rs.5,00,000) overlapped and one must be deleted - The respondent submitted that the compensation was inadequate given the 91.5% disability - No final decision on this issue is available in the provided text (Paras 7-8). E) Motor Accident Compensation - Pain and Suffering - Award of Rs.3,00,000 for Pain and Suffering Alleged Excessive - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The appellant sought reduction of the pain and suffering award as excessive; the respondent highlighted the claimant's severe injuries, three-year struggle for life, and permanent vegetable state to justify adequate compensation - The court considered the evidence of the claimant's mother describing the claimant's condition and reserved order; no final determination is available in the provided text (Paras 7-8, 12-13).
Issue of Consideration
Whether 246-day delay in filing appeal should be condoned; Whether Tribunal's award of dependency compensation of Rs.16,20,000 by adding 50% future prospects is contrary to National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and should be reduced to 40%; Whether awards for future medical expenses, attendant fees, pain and suffering are excessive; Whether overlapping heads of loss of amenities & marriage prospects and loss of expectations in life require deletion; Whether overall compensation should be enhanced given 91.5% disability and vegetable state
Final Decision
The court condoned the 246-day delay in filing the appeal and disposed of Misc. Civil Application No.369 of 2018. It took up the appeal on merits, heard counsel, and reserved order on quantum of compensation. The final decision on modification of the award is not mentioned in the provided text.
Law Points
- Condonation of delay can be granted when prolonging matter on delay would delay cause of severely injured claimant
- uninspiring reasons for delay not unavoidable circumstances but delay condoned for adjudication on merits
- addition to notional income for future prospects cannot exceed 40% as per National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi
- overlapping heads of compensation such as loss of amenities and loss of expectations must be avoided
- awards for future medical expenses
- attendant fees
- and pain and suffering must be reasonable and not excessive
- victim with 91.5% disability and vegetable state entitled to adequate compensation including future care
