9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Determination of compensation u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for injuries sustained in a road accident, interpretation of insurance liability, entitlement to enhanced compensation for permanent disability, consideration of future loss of income, and award of interest on compensation.
Compensation Determination: The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal initially awarded compensation of &8377; 1,83,000, including amounts for agony, hospitalization, loss of income, and damage to the scooter. The Tribunal held the insurance company liable up to &8377; 1,50,000, with the remaining amount to be paid by the respondent. The High Court later enhanced the compensation to &8377; 2,90,000 and directed payment of interest at 12% per annum, rejecting the limited liability of the insurance company. Insurance Liability Interpretation: The High Court set aside the finding of limited liability of the insurance company, holding that without the insurance policy being proved, the liability should be considered unlimited. The court considered the evidence of injuries suffered and adopted a liberal approach in determining the compensation, including interest at 12% per annum. Entitlement to Enhanced Compensation: The Division Bench of the High Court enhanced the compensation under the head of 'loss of income' from &8377; 1,12,000 to &8377; 1,50,000, taking into account the appellant's permanent disability. The appellant sought further compensation for future expenses like engaging a driver, but the court declined to enhance the amount beyond what was already awarded. Award of Interest: The High Court awarded interest at 12% per annum, which was later reduced to 9% per annum by the Supreme Court considering the prevailing bank rate. The court emphasized that interest is granted as compensation and should be just and reasonable based on the circumstances of each case. Future Loss of Income Consideration: The court declined to enhance the compensation for future loss of income, noting that the appellant, being a lawyer, could still pursue his profession despite the injuries suffered. The court relied on previous judgments to support its decision not to increase the compensation further. Conclusion: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the decisions of the lower courts regarding compensation, insurance liability, interest rates, and future loss of income considerations. The court found the previous awards to be generous and declined to interfere with the judgments.
|
