Supreme Court of India
VELAYUDHAN versus NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR. on 7 September 2022
222
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 7 S.C.R.
A
VELAYUDHAN
v.
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.
B
(Civil Appeal No. 6164 of 2022)
SEPTEMBER 07, 2022
[M. R. SHAH AND KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.]
Compensation – Vehicular Accident – Appellant-ClaimantCsustained very serious injuries resulting into 68% permanentdisability – Held: Tribunal and High Court awarded Rs.50,000/-only towards pain and suffering – Further, High Court erred inawarding the future economic loss treating the income of the claimantat Rs. 3,000/- per month only – Claimant was working as a MasonD– Permanent disability assessed by the High Court is at 100% –Even considering the minimum wages payable to the Mason andthe future rise in income, the claimant is entitled to the economicloss past as well as future considering the income at Rs. 5,000/- permonth – Claimant was 40 years of age, multiplier of 15 applied –EImpugned order passed by the High Court modified – Rs. 24,000/-awarded towards loss of earing, Rs. 9,00,000/- towards futureeconomic loss (instead of Rs. 5,40,000/- as awarded by the HighCourt) and Rs. 4,00,000/- towards pain, shock, and suffering –Claimant entitled to Rs. 15,42,800/- with 7.5% interest p.a. from theFdate of the claim petition, till satisfaction – Respondent-InsuranceCompany to pay the enhanced amount of compensation.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6164of 2022.
GFrom the Judgment and Order dated 23.10.2018 of the High Courtof Kerala at Ernakulam in MACA.No. 2601 of 2008.
A. Karthik, Sajith P., Ms. Anupriya, Alok Kr. Dwivedi, Ms. SarikaVerma, Advs. for the Appellant.
H
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgmentand order dated 23.10.2018 passed by the High Court of Kerala atErnakulam in MACA No. 2601/2008, by which, the High Court haspartly allowed the said appeal and enhanced the total amount ofcompensation to Rs. 8,24,800/-, the original claimant has preferred thepresent appeal.
2. In a vehicular accident, the appellant herein – original claimantsustained very serious injuries resulting into 68% permanent disability(the High Court assessed the same as 100%). The appellant sustainedhead injury with right temporal contusion with SDH and brain stem injury,fracture multiple metatarsal bones, fracture medial malleolus left foot,pneumothorax left with fracture ribs left side, lacerated wound occipitalscalp, contusion left upper arm mid outer side with limited movement ofupper limb, burns injury left leg antero medially mid part lacerated woundleg mid anteriorly with adjacent abrasion, lacerated wound between littletoe and fourth toe, edema left foot dorsal side multiple bodily injuries.The claimant filed claim petition before the learned Tribunal towardscompensation. The learned Tribunal awarded the compensation underdifferent heads as under: - The learned Tribunal assessed the income of the claimant atRs. 2,000/- per month and accordingly, awarded actual economic loss aswell as future economic loss. The learned Tribunal awardedRs. 50,000/- towards pain and suffering. In the appeal, the High Court B
C
E
F
G
H
Athough assessed the permanent disability at 100% for working out of thecompensation, enhanced the amount of compensation with respect tothe future economic loss considering the income of the injured – claimantat Rs. 3,000/- per month. The High Court did not enhance the amount ofcompensation under other heads.
B2.1 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgmentand order of the High Court, the original claimant – injured has preferredthe present appeal.
3. We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of theappellant. At the outset, it is required to be noted that in the vehicularCaccident the appellant sustained very serious injuries referred tohereinabove and suffered trauma and suffering. The learned Tribunaland the High Court assessed and awarded Rs. 50,000/- only towardspain and suffering. Considering the serious injuries suffered by theappellant – claimant and prolonged hospitalisation and the pain andsuffering and trauma suffered by the appellant due to the accident, weDare of the opinion that the amount of Rs. 50,000/- awarded towards painand suffering can be said to on a lower side. We are of the opinion thatin the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the seriousinjuries, prolonged hospitalisation and the pain, shock and suffering andtrauma, which might have been suffered by the appellant – claimant, itEwould be just and proper to award Rs. 4,00,000/- under the head of pain,shock, and suffering.
4. Similarly, the High Court has erred in awarding the futureeconomic loss treating the income of the claimant at Rs. 3,000/- permonth only. The claimant was working as a Mason. The permanentFdisability assessed by the High Court is at 100%. Therefore, evenconsidering the minimum wages payable to the Mason and the futurerise in income, the claimant shall be entitled to the economic loss past aswell as future considering the income of the claimant at Rs. 5,000/- permonth. Looking to the age of the claimant that was 40 years, multiplierof 15 is required to be applied.G
5. In view of the above, the present appeal is allowed. Theimpugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is modifiedawarding Rs. 24,000/- towards loss of earing; Rs. 9,00,000/- towardsfuture economic loss (instead of Rs. 5,40,000/- as awarded by the HighCourt) and Rs. 4,00,000/- towards pain, shock, and suffering. Thus, theH
claimant shall be entitled to a total sum of Rs. 15,42,800/- with 7.5%interest per annum from the date of the claim petition, till satisfaction.The respondent – Insurance Company is directed to pay/deposit theenhanced amount of compensation as per the present judgment and orderwithin a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. The present appeal is partly allowed to the aforesaid extent.No costs.
Divya Pandey(Assisted by : Roopanshi Virang, LCRA)
Appeal partly allowed.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H