LexN. SURESH versus YUSUF SHARIFF & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2012] 5 S.C.R. 118 N. SURESH v. YUSUF SHARIFF & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 2942 of 2012) MARCH 19, 2012 [G.S. SINGHVI AND SUNDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, JJ.] Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: s. 166 - Compensation - Motor C accident of victim riding a moped due to rash and negligent driving of lorry - Victim aged 32 years suffered 90% permanent disability in his right leg which had to be amputated and also 50% to 60% disability of mouth and other parts of the body - Tribunal applied multiplier of 16 and awarded total o compensation of Rs.4.17 lacs by taking his monthly income as Rs.2000 - High Court enhanced compensation to Rs. 7.26 lacs by taking salary as Rs.3000 - On appeal, held: The evidence on record showed that victim was earning Rs. 8500 per month prior to the accident - Victim was 32 years of age E at the time of accident, therefore, tribunal rightly applied multiplier of 16 to determine the compensation - Once income is assessed at Rs.8500 p.m. annual income would by Rs.1,02,000 p.a. - 90% of same would be Rs.91,800 and same multiplied by 16 would come to Rs.1468800 towards F loss of future earnings - The nature of injuries and treatment taken by appellant showed that victim must not have been able to work for minimum of 6 months - Rs.51,000 awarded towards loss of income during treatment - The amount towards medical bills was Rs.1,86,000 - Amount awarded by High Court is modified and respondent-insurance company G is directed to pay Rs. 19, 7 5, 800 with 6% interest to the victim. H CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2942 of 2012. 118 N. SURESH v. YUSUF SHARIFF & ANR. 119 From the Judgment & Order dated 28.09.2010 of the High A Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in M.F.A. No. 11865 of 2010. Sharana Gouda N. Patil, Ashok Kumar Gupta II for the Appellant. The order of the Court was delivered ORDER 1. Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. B c 3. Feeling dissatisfied with the nominal enhancement granted by the High Court in the amount of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Maddur (Karnataka) in M.V.C.No.106/2003, the appellant has filed this D appeal. 4. The appellant, who has suffered 90% permanent disability in his right leg which is paralysed and 50% to 60% disability of mouth and other parts of the body due to an accident which occurred on 28th February, 2003, filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for award of compensation of Rs.21,50,000/- with interest. E 5. The case of the appellant is that on 28th February, 2003 F at about 11.30 a.m., he along with his wife-Savitha was travelling on a TVS Moped bearing Registration No.KA-01/ H4236 on the left side of the road. He was waiting near T. Ballekere cross to take turn to go to Koppa. At that time, a lorry bearing Registration No.CNT/7206 driven by its driver in a rash G and negligent manner with high speed came to the extreme left side of the road and dashed into the vehicle of the appellant and caused the accident. Due to the accident, the appellant fell down and sustained grievous injuries. He was shifted to the hospital and in course was given treatment at different H 120 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 5 S.C.R. A hospitals. The appellant contended that he was aged about 32 years on the date of accident and was earning more than Rs.8,000/- per month. After the accident, he has suffered permanent disability and, therefore, he is not in a position to work as before. During the course of treatment in different B hospitals, he had incurred medical expenses to the tune of Rs.4,50,000/- so far. After the accident, he was immediately taken to the Government Hospital, Koppa. Thereafter he was shifted to Mandya General Hospital and then he was taken to J.S.S. Hospital, Mysore and from there he was further shifted c to Mallige Hospital, Bangalore. Lastly, he was taken to St. John Medical College Hospital, Bangalore where he was treated as indoor patient and underwent an operation of the right leg mandible, right hip, left leg, stomach and jaw(face). In the said accident, the appellant lost all his teeth except 7 teeth in the D upper jaw and 5 teeth in the lower jaw. After the operation he has become permanently disabled and will have to spend a huge amount towards medical expenses. The Doctor has assessed the disability at 90% in his right leg which has permanently paralysed; 50% to
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.