LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
โš–๏ธ Ask the AI about your situation:๐Ÿš— Car Accident๐Ÿ’ผ Work / Job๐Ÿ  Housing / Eviction๐Ÿ‘ช Family / Divorce๐Ÿ“‹ Contract Dispute๐Ÿ’ฐ Money Owed

LAL SINGH MARABI versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS.

Citation: [2017] 2 S.C.R. 759 · Decided: 15-02-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.S. KHEHAR

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] 2 S.C.R. 759 
LAL SINGH MARABI 
v. 
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 3 764 of20 I 7) 
FERUARY 15, 2017 
[JAGDISII SINGH KHEHAR, CJI, N.V. RAMANA AND 
DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.] 
Motor Vehicles Act. 1988 - s.166 - Quantum of compensation 
- Grievous injuries resulting in amputation of leg - Claim for 
compensation - Plea of claimant that he was professional driver 
earning monthly income of Rs.-1000 which he lost due to 90% 
disabilily sustained in the accident - Tribunal held that claimant 
could 1101 prove hfaยท earning of Rs.-1000 p.111. by doing driving job -
Tribunal fixed annual income at Rs.15000 and 60% decrease in his 
work efficiency and accordingly worked oul compensation- High 
Court enhanced compensation amount taking w111ual income as 
Rs.24000 -Appeal for enhanceme111 of co111pensa1ion - Held: Courts 
below erred in reducing !he per111anent disabiliry determined by the 
Doctor at 90% to 60% on the ground that despile the amputalion of 
his left leg, the remaining body of the appellant was heal1hy -
Considering the factual matrix of the case including the fact that 
with the amputated leg the appeilant could not pursue his livelihood 
as a driver or daily wage labourer and taking into account the 
Doctors Certificate, permanent disability sustained due to the 
accidenl is taken as 90% - Thus, considering appellan/ :, annual 
income as Rs.24.000/- p.a .. 90% of it would be Rs.21,600/- and 
applying lhe multiplier 17, compensation awarded under the head 
of 'permanent disability' at Rs. 3,67.200/- - Also Rs.1.00.0001-
awarded toward' lhe cost <if 1he artificial limb - 171e Iota/ quantum 
of co111pensatio11 amoulll enhanced .fiwn Rs. 3,57,800/- as awarded 
by the High Court. to Rs. 5.20,2001- and interest @ 6% p.a. from 
!he date of filing r!f !he claim pelition !ill realization of the 
a111ount. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
HELD: There is no denial of the fact that the appellant had 
suffered a major injury in the accident and sustained a permanent 
H 
759 
760 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 2 S.C.R. 
disability by the amputation of his left leg. Consequently, the 
appellant, who was only 29 years old at the time of accident, had 
undergone agony, both physically and mentally besides spending 
money on his treatment and for the artificial limb. It is clear from 
the medical certificate issued by PW-2 that due to the amputation 
of his leg, the appellant sustained a permanent disability of 90%. 
The Courts below reduced the permanent disability factor from 
90% to 60%. Upon appreciating the factual matrix of the case 
including the fact that with the amputated leg the appellant cannot 
pursue his livelihood as a driver or daily wage labourer and taking 
into account the Doctor's Certificate, the appellant has sustained 
90% permanent disability due to the accident. Thus, considering 
the appellant's annual income as Rs.24,000/- p.a., 90% of it would 
come to Rs.21,600/- and applying the multiplier 17, he would be 
entitled nuder the bead of 'permanent disability' to compensation 
computed at Rs. 3,67,200/- (i.e.Rs.21,600 multiplied by 17). The 
appellant is also entitled to get Rs.1,00,000/- instead of Rs.60,000/ 
- as awarded by th~ High Court towards the cost of the artificial 
limb. Taking into account these figures, the total quantum of 
compensation amount would stand enhanced from Rs. 3,57 ,800/ 
- as awarded by the High Court, to Rs. 5,20,200/-. The appellant 
is also entitled to receive interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of 
filing of the claim petition till realization of the amount. [Paras 
9, 10 and 11) [762-H; 763-A-F] 
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh & Ors. 
(2004) 3 SCC 297 : [2004] 1 SCR 180 - referred to. 
J2004J 1 SCR 180 
Case Law Reference 
referred to 
Para 6 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3764 
of2017. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 04.04.2013 of the High Court 
G 
of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur in M.A. No. 4056 of2006. 
H 
Chandra Mohan Anisctty (For Dr. Kai lash Chand), Adv. for the 
Appellant. 
Ravi Bakshi, Chander Shekhar Ashri, Ad vs. for the Respondent. 
LAL SINGH MARABI v. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY 
761 
LTD. & ORS. 
The Order of the Court was delivered by 
A 
N.V:RAMANA, J. 1. Delay condoned. Leave granted. 
2. The appellant, who was severely injured in a motor accident, 
has preferred this appeal aggrieved by the quantum of compensation 
awarded by the Principal Bench of the 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.