Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Amarsinh Anopsinh Chauhan, filed a First Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated 30.11.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Godhara, in MACP No.31 of 2019. The appellant was injured in a motor accident on 27.12.2016 when an ST bus driven rashly and negligently dashed his parked motorcycle at Vejalpur Bus Stand. He sustained grievous injuries and was treated at Godhra Civil Hospital. He filed a claim petition seeking Rs.5,00,000/- compensation, but the Tribunal awarded only Rs.76,520/-. The appellant challenged the award on grounds that the Tribunal failed to consider future prospective income, assessed his income incorrectly (he claimed Rs.7,000/- per month from private job and agriculture), and awarded meager amounts under pain and suffering (Rs.10,000/-) and special diet and attendant charges (Rs.10,000/-). The respondent, GSRTC, opposed the appeal, arguing the award was just and proper. The High Court, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Govind Yadav v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2012(1) TAC 1 (SC)), held that in the absence of proof of income, the Tribunal should consider minimum wages. Since the accident occurred in December 2016, the minimum wage for an unskilled worker was Rs.7,700/- per month. The Court also held that 10% future prospects should be added for a 60-year-old claimant. The Court recalculated the compensation: income assessed at Rs.7,700/- per month, 10% future prospects added (Rs.770/-), total monthly income Rs.8,470/-. Applying a multiplier of 9 (as per Sarla Verma v. DTC) and 10% disability (as assessed by the Tribunal), the loss of future earning capacity was computed as Rs.8,470 x 12 x 9 x 10% = Rs.91,476/-. The Court also enhanced pain and suffering to Rs.20,000/- and special diet and attendant charges to Rs.15,000/-. The total compensation was recalculated as Rs.1,26,476/- (including Rs.91,476 for future loss, Rs.20,000 for pain, Rs.15,000 for diet/attendant, and actual medical expenses of Rs.10,000/- as awarded by Tribunal). The appeal was partly allowed, enhancing the compensation from Rs.76,520/- to Rs.1,26,476/- with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of petition till realization.
Headnote
A) Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation - Future Prospective Income - Minimum Wages - The Tribunal erred in not considering future prospective income for a 60-year-old claimant and in assessing income without reference to minimum wages - Held that in absence of proof of income, minimum wages for unskilled workers should be considered, and 10% future prospects should be added (Paras 6-7). B) Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation - Non-Pecuniary Damages - Pain and Suffering - The Tribunal awarded only Rs.10,000/- under the head of pain, shock and suffering, which is meager - Held that the amount is enhanced to Rs.20,000/- considering the grievous injuries sustained (Para 8). C) Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation - Non-Pecuniary Damages - Special Diet and Attendant Charges - The Tribunal awarded only Rs.10,000/- under this head, which is inadequate - Held that the amount is enhanced to Rs.15,000/- (Para 8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Tribunal erred in not considering future prospective income and in awarding meager amounts under the heads of pain, shock and suffering, and special diet and attendant charges, and whether the income of the claimant was properly assessed.
Final Decision
The appeal is partly allowed. The compensation is enhanced from Rs.76,520/- to Rs.1,26,476/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The respondent No.2 (GSRTC) is directed to deposit the enhanced amount with accrued interest within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the judgment. The appellant is permitted to withdraw the amount with accrued interest.
Law Points
- Motor accident compensation
- future prospective income
- minimum wages
- non-pecuniary damages
- pain and suffering
- special diet and attendant charges
