| |
CDJ 2025 SC 1913
|
| Court : Supreme Court of India |
| Case No : Civil Appeal Nos. of 2025 (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 17828-17829 of 2025) |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI |
| Parties : Narendra Pratap Singh Versus National Insurance Company Limited & Others |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: ----- For the Respondent: ----- |
| Date of Judgment : 25-11-2025 |
| Head Note :- |
| Motor Accidents Claims Act, 1988 - Section 15 (1) - |
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules / Orders / Regulations, and Sections Mentioned:
- Section 15 (1) of the Motor Accidents Claims Act, 1988
2. Catch Words:
- loss of earning capacity
- disability
- compensation
- motor accident
- appeal
- reduction of award
3. Summary:
The claimant challenged the High Court’s order that reduced the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal from Rs. 4,70,000 to Rs. 1,03,000. The Tribunal had granted compensation for loss of earning capacity, loss of joyful life, pain and suffering, and medical expenses based on a 50% disability of the claimant’s right leg. The High Court reduced the loss‑of‑earning‑capacity component, relying on the renewal of the claimant’s transport licence under Section 15(1) of the Motor Accidents Claims Act, 1988, assuming fitness. The Supreme Court observed that licence renewal alone does not determine loss of earning capacity and noted the High Court failed to assess the actual impact of the disability. Given the passage of time, the Court chose not to remit the matter but restored the Tribunal’s original award. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the High Court order.
4. Conclusion:
Appeal Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
1. Leave granted.
2. The claimant is before this Court challenging the order of the High Court whereby the High Court has partly allowed the appeal preferred by respondent-Insurance Company to reduce the compensation from Rs. 4,70,000/- (Rs. Four Lakh Seventy Thousand only) as awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, to Rs. 1,03,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Three Thousand only).
3. Admittedly, the petitioner-claimant was a driver aged about 32 years as on date of accident i.e. 06.08.1996 and has suffered 50% disability of his right leg due to shortening of leg by 03 inches. The Tribunal assessed his monthly income at Rs. 4,000/- (Rs. Four Thousand only) and on the basis of disability certificate and applicable multiplier of 17, allowed the sum of Rs. 4,08,000/- (Rs. Four Thousand Eight Lakh only) as compensation for loss of earning apacity. He was also awarded Rs. 15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) for deprivation of joyful life, Rs. 17,000 (Rs. Seventeen Thousand only) for mental and physical pain and sufferings and Rs. 30,000/-(Rs. Thirty Thousand only) for expenses incurred towards medical treatment.
3. The High Court has reduced the compensation for loss of earning capacity on the ground that since after the accident, petitioner got his transport vehicle license renewed from 08.12.1997 to 07.12.2000 and the said renewal of transport vehicle driving license necessarily involved submission of a medical certificate of fitness and thus the petitioner having presumed to have presented such certificate, has not suffered any incapacity to drive any transport vehicle thus there is no loss of earning capacity. Likewise, since the petitioner has not suffered from any loss of earning capacity, there is no question of loss of future income also.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record, we notice that though High Court has taken note of Section 15 (1) of the Motor Accidents Claims Act, 1988 containing provision regarding renewal of driving license, however, that by itself would not be the sole governing factor to assess the loss of earning capacity. Even if the driving license was renewed on submission of medical certificate, there is no discussion by the High Court as to the manner in which the said event has affected either way petitioner's earning capacity. Since admittedly the petitioner has suffered 50% disability in his right leg due to shortening of leg by 03 inches, there is some loss of earning capacity. In a normal circumstances we would have remitted the matter back for assessment of loss of earning capacity, as the said issue was not dealt with by the High Court. However, considering that the accident occurred on 06.08.1996, almost 29 years back, and the petitioner was allowed Rs. 4,70,000/- (Rs. Four Lakh Seventy Thousand only), we are not inclined to remit the matter back. It was the duty of the Court to have judicially determined the exact loss of earning capacity of the claimant due to disability he has suffered on account of the accident. The said has not been done by the High Court.
5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to allow the present appeal, set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court and to restore the award passed by the Tribunal.
6. Accordingly, the Civil Appeal is allowed.
7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
|
| |