Satbir v. Babu Lal and Ors

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

FAO-2153-2006 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 26, 2024

Satbir ......Appellant(s)

Vs.

Babu Lal and Others ......Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Present: Mr. Sushil Sheoran, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Paul S. Saini, Advocate for the respondent – Insurance Co. ---- SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (ORAL)

¶1The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the award dated 04.03.2006 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Motor Vehicles Amendment Act, 1994 (Act No.54 of 1994) by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani (for short, 'the Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation granted to him on account of injuries received by him. FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

¶2The brief facts of the case are that on 28.04.2003 around 9.30 AM, the claimant Satbir along with Mahabir Singh (since deceased) were going on a scooter from Charkhi Dadri to their Village Rawaldhi. The scooter was being driven by Mahabir Singh (since deceased). When they reached on the Rohtak-byepass, the offending truck bearing registration No.RJ-18G-1494, driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, came from backside and dashed

against the scoo multiple injurie Singh lodged FI clerical error/mi instead of Babu mason by prof treatment.

3.

Up the factum of co

4.

Fro issues:-

5.

Aft record, the lear alongwith inter present appeal f

oter. As a result, the claimant S s. The accident was witnessed IR with the police and the drive istake, the name of the driver ha Lal. Mahbir Singh succumbed t fession and he incurred about on notice of the claim petition, ompensation. om the pleadings of the parties,

¶1Whether the acciden

28.04.2003, due to rash or vehicle i.e. truck bearing re part of respondent No.1 resu and injuries to Satbir? OPP

¶2If issue No.1 is pro entitled to compensation, i whom? OPP

¶3Whether respondent N possessed a valid and effect accident? OPR

¶4Relief.

ter taking into consideration th rned Tribunal awarded compens est @ 9% per annum. Hence for enhancement of compensation

Satbir and Mahabir Singh sustain d by one Suresh. Claimant Sa er was challaned. However, due as been mentioned as Suresh in F to his injuries. Claimant Satbir rupees two lacs on his medi , respondents appeared and den the Tribunal framed the follow nt, in question, took place negligent driving of the offend egistration No.RJ-18G-1494 on ulting into death of Mahabir Sin oved, whether the petitioners if so, to what amount and fr No.1 driver of the offending vehi tive driving licence on the date he pleadings and the evidence sation to the tune of Rs.1,23,91 the claimants/appellants filed n awarded by the Tribunal.

ned atbir e to FIR is a ical nied wing on ding ngh are rom cle, e of on 19/-

SUBMISSIONS

6.

The amount assessed that no amount future loss of inc

7.

Per however, vehem of compensation

8.

I h record of this ca

9.

A p claimant-appella the record revea income was asse the present case with the minim Further no am transportation, a this Court. SETTLED LAW

10.

Ho compensation w Kumar Vs. Aja held as under:-

S OF THE COUNSELS e learned counsel for the clai d by the learned Tribunal is on has been awarded towards disa come. Therefore, he prays that t r contra, learned counsel for th mently argues that the award has n as assessed by the learned Trib have heard learned counsel for ase. perusal of the award indicates ant was assessed to be 90% as als that the claimant was stated erted to be Rs.5000/- per month. e, his income is assessed to be R mum wages prescribed for skille mount was granted towards lo attendant charges etc. Therefore W ON COMPENSATION n'ble Supreme Court has set with respect to the disability. T ay Kumar and Another (2011)

imant-appellant contends that the lower side. He further subm ability, transportation, attendant the present appeal be allowed. he respondent-Insurance Compa rightly been passed and the amo unal has rightly been granted. the parties and perused the wh that the disability suffered by per certificate Ex.PW7/A. Furt to be mason by profession and However, under prevailing facts Rs.2700/- per month in accorda ed worker in the State of Harya oss of income, future prospe e, the award requires inference ttled the law regarding grant The Apex Court in the case of ) 1 Supreme Court Cases 343,

mits and any, ount hole ther his s of ance ana. ects, by t of Raj

Gen

¶5ma com res awa wro equ dam or disa be suff com tho inju hav Ltd

¶6inju Pec

(i) tran

neral principles relating to comp The provision of the Motor Ve kes it clear that the award mpensation should, to the exte tore the claimant to the position arding damages is to make goo ong done as far as money can uitable manner. The court or mages objectively and exclude f fancy, though some conjecture ability and its consequences, is compensated for the physical inj ffered as a result of such inju mpensated for his inability to le ose normal amenities which he uries, and his inability to earn a ve earned. (See C.K. Subramoni 70 Supreme Court 376, R.D. H d., 1995 (1) SCC 551 and Baker v The heads under which com ury cases are the following : cuniary damages (Special Dama Expenses relating to treatm nsportation, nourishing food, an

mpensation in injury cases Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for sho must be just, which means t ent possible, fully and adequa prior to the accident. The objec od the loss suffered as a result n do so, in a fair, reasonable a tribunal shall have to assess from consideration any speculat e with reference to the nature inevitable. A person is not only njury, but also for the loss which ury. This means that he is to ead a full life, his inability to en e would have enjoyed but for as much as he used to earn or co ia Iyer v. T. Kunhikuttan Nair, A Hattangadi v. Pest Control (Ind v. Willoughby, 1970 AC 467). mpensation is awarded in perso ages) ment, hospitalization, medicin nd miscellaneous expenditure.

ort) that tely ct of t of and tion e of y to h he be njoy ould AIR dia) onal nes,

(ii) ma

(iii) Da

(iv) inju

(v)

(vi) In r und whe of t hea acc am exp

19.

(i) A res

(ii) who

Loss of earnings (and other ga de had he not been injured, comp

(a) Loss of earning during th

(b) Loss of future earnings on ) Future medical expenses. N mages) ) Damages for pain, suffering an uries. Loss of amenities (and/or loss of ) Loss of expectation of life (shor routine personal injury cases, c der heads (i), (ii)(a) and (iv). It ere there is specific medical ev the claimant, that compensation ads (ii)(b), (iii), (v) and (vi) rel count of permanent disability, enities (and/or loss of prosp pectation of life. xxx

xxx We may now summarise the pr All injuries (or permanent disab ult in loss of earning capacity. The percentage of permanen ole body of a person, cannot b

ains) which the injured would h mprising : he period of treatment; n account of permanent disabilit Non-pecuniary damages (Gene nd trauma as a consequence of of prospects of marriage). rtening of normal longevity). compensation will be awarded o t is only in serious cases of inju vidence corroborating the evide n will be granted under any of lating to loss of future earnings future medical expenses, loss pects of marriage) and loss xxx

xxx rinciples discussed above : bilities arising from injuries), do nt disability with reference to e assumed to be the percentage

ave ty. eral f the only ury, ence f the s on s of of not

loss ear disa evid sam

(iii) sub evid ear Tri

(iv) of l nat fac

¶20wit Illu ear evid inju per how bec gra

s of earning capacity. To put it d rning capacity is not the same ability (except in a few cases, w dence, concludes that percentag me as percentage of permanent d ) The doctor who treated an inju bsequently to assess the extent of dence only in regard the extent rning capacity is something tha ibunal with reference to the evide ) The same permanent disability loss of earning capacity in diffe ture of profession, occupation ctors. The assessment of loss of fu th reference to the following ustration 'A' : The injured, a w rning Rs. 3000/- per month at th dence, the permanent disability ury was 60% and the consequ rson was quantified at 30%. wever assessed by the Tribunal cause the claimant is continue ade. Calculation of compensation

differently, the percentage of loss e as the percentage of perman where the Tribunal on the basis ge of loss of earning capacity is disability). ured-claimant or who examined h of his permanent disability can g of permanent disability. The loss at will have to be assessed by ence in entirety. may result in different percenta ferent persons, depending upon or job, age, education and ot uture earnings is explained bel workman, was aged 30 years a he time of accident. As per Docto of the limb as a consequence of uential permanent disability to The loss of earning capacity l as 15% on the basis of eviden ed in employment, but in a low n will be as follows:

s of nent s of him give s of ages ther low and or's f the y is nce,

Illu is a lon and Tri 75% Illu Eng two The inc ass cap wil

a) Annual income before the b) Loss of future earning per (15% of the prior annual inc c) Multiplier applicable with d) Loss of future earnings : ( ustration 'B' : The injured was a 00/- per month. His hand is amp assessed at 60%. He was termi nger drive. His chances of gettin d even if he got any job, the sala ibunal therefore assessed his lo %. Calculation of compensation a) Annual income prior to th b) Loss of future earning per (75% of the prior annual inc c) Multiplier applicable with d) Loss of future earnings : ( ustration 'C' : The injured w gineering student. As a result of o months, his right hand was a e permanent disablement was as capacitated to pursue his chose sistance of a servant throughout pacity was also assessed as 70% ll be as follows :

e accident : Rs. 36,000/-. r annum come) : Rs. 5400/-. h reference to age : 17 (5400 x 17) : Rs. 91,800/- a driver aged 30 years, earning putated and his permanent disabi inated from his job as he could ng any other employment was bl ary was likely to be a pittance. T oss of future earning capacity will be as follows : e accident : Rs. 36,000/- . r annum come) : Rs. 27000/-. h reference to age : 17 (27000 x 17) : Rs. 4,59,000/- was 25 years and a final y of the accident, he was in coma amputated and vision was affect ssessed as 70%. As the injured w en career and as he required t his life, the loss of future earn %. The calculation of compensat

Rs. ility d no leak The y as year for ted. was ning

a) M hav Eng b) L (70 c) M d) L [No hyp act

12.

Ho Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sections 166, 1 aspects:-

(A) mu

(B)

(C)

(D) esta

(E) age The

Minimum annual income he wou ve got if had been employed as a gineer

Loss of future earning per annum 0% of the expected annual incom Multiplier applicable (25 years) Loss of future earnings : (42000 ote : The figures adopted in pothetical. The figures in Illust tuals taken from the decision in A n'ble Supreme Court in the case y Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 63-A and 168 of the Motor Ve ) Deduction of personal an ultiplicand; ) Selection of multiplier depen ) Age of deceased on basis for ) Reasonable figures on con ate, loss of consortium and funer ) Future prospects for all cate es: with permanent job; self-emp e relevant portion of the judgmen " Therefore, we think it seems to us that reasonabl namely, loss of estate, loss o

uld an

: Rs. 60,000/-m me) : Rs. 42000/-

: 18 x 18) : Rs. 7,56,000/- n illustrations (A) and (B) tration (C) however are based Arvind Kumar Mishra (supra)]. e of National Insurance Compa C 680] has clarified the law un ehicles Act, 1988, on the follow nd living expenses to determ nding on age of deceased; r applying multiplier; nventional heads, namely, loss ral expenses, with escalation; egories of persons and for differ ployed or fixed salary. nt is reproduced as under:- t seemly to fix reasonable sums le figures on conventional hea of consortium and funeral expen

are on any nder wing mine of rent s. It ads,

13.

Ho Express Tran. C " 7

(a) age Ins effe Tra gro fac for

should be Rs.15,000, Rs.40 The principle of revisiting principle. But the revisit sho centric. We think that it wou we have quantified should b every three years and the en 10% in a span of three yea because that will bring in heads." n'ble Supreme Court in the ca Corpn. Ltd. 2020 ACJ 2159, has

¶7There are three aspects which ) the application of multiplier of The aforesaid increase of m e of the appellant as 23 years re urance Company Limited v. Pr 00 (SC). In para 46 of the said ectively affirmed the multiplier m e table in the case of Sarla V ansport Corporation and Anothe oup of 15-25 years, the multi ctoring in the extent of disability. The aforesaid position is not the respondent State Corpora

0,000 and Rs.15,000 respectiv the said heads is an accepta uld not be fact-centric or quantu uld be condign that the amount t be enhanced on percentage basis nhancement should be at the rate ars. We are disposed to hold n consistency in respect of th ase of Erudhaya Priya Vs. St s held as under:- are required to be examined by f '17' instead of '18'; multiplier is sought on the basis elying on the judgment in Natio ranay Sethi and Others, 2017 A d judgment, the Constitution Ben method to be used as mentioned Verma (Smt) and Others v. De er, 2009 ACJ 1298 (SC) . In the a iplier has to be '18' along w

t really disputed by learned coun ation and, thus, we come to

ely. able um-that s in e of d so ose tate us: s of onal ACJ nch d in elhi age with

con app

(b) disa

com Jag Kha bel jud mu

nclusion that the multiplier to pellant has to be '18' and not '17 Loss of earning capacity of ability of 31.1% In respect of the aforesa mpensation on what is stated to gdish v. Mohan & Others, 20 anuja v. Atul Dande & Another low the principle set out in the Ja "8. In assessing the compens need to be borne in mind. A temporary disability occasio award of compensation. The among others, the following

(i) Pain, suffering and tra

(ii) Loss of income includ

(iii) The inability of the vi with its amenities;

(iv) Medical expenses incl required to undertake

(v) Loss of expectation of The aforesaid principle has dgment, i.e. the Sandeep Khanu ltiplier method was logically so

o be applied in the case of 7'. of the appellant with perman aid, the appellant has claim o be the settled principle set ou 018 ACJ 1011 (SC) and Sand r, 2017 ACJ 979 (SC). We extr agdish (supra) in para 8: sation payable the settled princip victim who suffers a permanent ned by an accident is entitled to award of compensation must co aspects: auma resulting from the accident ding future income; ictim to lead a normal life toget luding those that the victim may in future; and f life." [emphasis supplied] also been emphasized in an ear uja case (supra) opining that ound and legally well established

nent med t in deep ract ples t or over t; ther y be rlier

qua disa disa occ und

antify the loss of income as ability suffered in an accident. In the factual contours of th ability certificate, it shows th casions for various number of 11 to January 2013. The natur der: "Nature of injury:

(i) compound fracture sha

(ii) fracture both bones lef

(iii) compound fracture bo

(iv) fracture 3rd, 4th & 5th

(v) subtrochanteric fractu

(vi) fracture shaft femur

(vii) fracture both bones lef We have also peruse petition showing the curren though it is stated by learne Corporation that the same w Be that as it may, this is the the nature of injuries itself been opined in para 13 of S while applying the multipl

a result of death or perman he present case, if we examine he admission/hospitalization on days over 1½ years from Aug re of injuries had been set out aft left humerus ft forearm th bones right forearm h metacarpals right hand ure right femur ft leg ed the photographs annexed to nt physical state of the appella ed counsel for the respondent St was not on record in the trial co e position even after treatment a f show their extent. Further, it Sandeep Khanuja case (supra) t lier method, future prospects

nent n 8 gust t as ant, tate urt. and has that

advancement in life and c consideration. We are, thus, unequivo in the contention of the app with regard to future prospec of the appellant taking the p quantification of the same National Insurance Co. Ltd para 61(iii), considering th 50% of the actual salary in th

(c) The third and the last as 12% In respect of the afo down the interest rate durin view of the judicial pronoun case (supra). On this aspect dispute raised by the learne the claim was confined to applied by this Court. CONCLUSION

¶8The result of the afores principles, the calculation of set out in para 5 of the syno follows:

career are also to be taken i ocally of the view that there is m pellant and the aforesaid princip cts must also be applied in the c permanent disability as 31.1%. T on the basis of the judgment d. case (supra), more specifica he age of the appellant, would he present case. spect is the interest rate claimed resaid, the appellant has wate ng the course of hearing to 9% ncements including in the Jagdis t, once again, there was no seri ed counsel for the respondent o 9% in line with the interest ra said is that relying on the sett f compensation by the appellant, opsis, would have to be adopted

into erit ples case The t in ally d be d as ered % in sh's ious nce ates tled , as

Rs. per

14.

Accordingly, as Court as ment compensation am Sr. No. Inco Futu Ann Los annu

¶5Mul

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, 41,69,831/- as claimed along w r annum from the date of applica In view of the above, per the settled principles of law ioned above, the appellant - mount as calculated below: Heads ome Rs ure Prospects 40% Rs nual Income Rs s of future earning per um Rs ltiplier (18) Rs

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/- be entitled to the compensation with simple interest at the rate of ation till the date of payment. the present appeal is allow w as laid down by Hon'ble Supre claimant is held entitled to Compensation Awarded s.2700/- s.1080/- (40% of 2700) s.45,360 /- (2700+1080 x 12) s.40,824/- (45360 x 90%) s.6,94,008/- (40,824 x 17)

n of f 9% wed.

Med Atte Pain Los Los Spe

Tot

Com

Enh

15.

So Court in Dara S and R.Valli and Supreme Cour per annum from

16.

The along with inter of receipt of cop to the appellant-furnish his bank

17.

As claim petition in driver and ow Company was d granted to respo view of the sam

dical Rs endant Charges Rs n and Sufferings Rs s of Expectation of life Rs s of Amenities of life Rs cial Diet Rs tal Compensation Rs mpensation awarded by Tribunal Rs hanced Compensation Rs far as the interest part is conce Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shy d Others VS. Tamil Nandu State t Cases 107, the amount so calc m the date of filing of the claim pe e Insurance Company is directe rest with the Tribunal within a p py of this judgment. The Tribun -claimant in his bank account. T k account details to the Tribunal. per award dated 04.03.2006, n favour of the claimant and ag wner of the vehicle respective directed to pay the compensation ondent No.3 to recover the same me, respondent No.3 Insurance

s.23,919/- s.50,000/- s.2,00,000/- s.1,00,000/- s.50,000/- s.50,000/- s.11,67,927/- s.1,23,919/- s.10,44,008/- erned, as held by Hon'ble Supre yam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 31 te Transport Corporation (2022 culated shall carry an interest @ etition, till the date of realization ed to deposit the awarded amo period of two months from the d nal is directed to disburse the sa The appellant-claimant is directed the learned Tribunal decided gainst respondent Nos. 1 and 2 ely. Respondent No.3-Insrua in the first instance and liberty w e from respondent Nos. 1 and 2. e company is directed to pay

eme 2) 5 @9% n. ount date ame d to i.e. ance was

compensation in the first instance and liberty is granted to respondent No.3 to recover the same from respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

¶17Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE September 19, 2024 tripti

Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking