LexREKHA JAIN versus NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2013) 13 S.C.R. 1113 :. ;. REKHA JAIN A 'v. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. (Civil Appeal Nos. 5370-5372 of 201~) AUGUST 1, 2013 B [G.S. SINGHVI AND V. GOPALA GOWDA, JJ.] , Motor VeMcles Act, 1988 - s.166 - Compensation - Grant of - Pecuniary damages towards medical expenses - Television and film actress met with accident and sustained . I grievous injuries on her face and other parts of the body which c was assessed at 30% permanent disability - Tribunal awarded Rs.17,51, 7261- towards pecuniary damages namely, medical charges, medicine expenses and other expenses - Amount reduced by High Court to Rs. 7, 77,0001- - D Justification ..., Held: Notjustified - Findings recorde(i by High CourtJor reduction of pecuniary damages from Rs.17,51, 7261 ·- to Rs. 7, 77, 0001- was wholly erroneous in law as the same was contrary to the facts pleaded and proved by producing evidence on record - Tribunal had awarded Rs. 17, 15, 7261- E towards the medical expenses based on the legal evidence and, therefore compensation awarded by the Tribunal was affirmed. ~ Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s.166 - Compensation - F Grant of - Physical disability and functional disability - Difference between - Held: A man is not compensated for physical injury; he is compensated for the loss which he suffers as a result of that injury - Functional disability is a forceful alteration of career option on account of physical and G ·~ mental injuries due to an accident - Even though a claimant -does not suffer from 100% physical permanent disability, he suffers from 100% functional disability if he loses the capacity to pursue his work as a result of the aocident. 1113 H 1114 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 13 S.C.R. A Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s. 166 - Compensation - ""' : Grant of - Pecuniary damages - Television and film actress met with an accident and sustained grievous injuries on her face and other parts of the body which was assessed at 30% permanent disability - Held: For a film actress, physical B appearance particularly the facial features are very important . to acrin films and T. V. serials - On account of the accident, the face of appellant was disfigured, she put on weight and became fat and· therefore was unable to perform the role as an actress in films in future - Though as per the District c Medical Board, the permanent disability of appellant was 30%, having regard to the nature of injuries suffered by her, the permanent disability of appellant should be treated as 100% functional disablement as she cannot act in the films and in T. V. serials in future. at all - This relevant aspect of 0 the matter was conveniently omitted to be considered both by the Tribunal as well as by the High Court while determining compensation under various heads ·of non-pec.uniary damages -On facts, annual income of appellant assessed at Rs.5,00,0001 - By adopting multiplier of 17, amount of Rs. 42, 50, 0001- awarded under the head of non-pecuniary E damages - Rs.10,00,0001- awarded for loss of amenities, pleasure of life and inability to attend social functions in future - Further Rs. 10, 00, 0001- awarded towards pain and suffering in view of the ordeal undergone by appellant. -1 F The appellant, a 24 year old model and actress, while driving a car met with an accident on account of rash and negligent driving by a truck driver. She sustained grievous injuries on her face and other parts of the body which was assessed at 30% permanent disability. The G appellant went through a number of surgeries on 1'-· acco·unt of the accident. The Tribunal awarded to appellant a total compensation of Rs.23,51,7261- including Rs.17,51,726/- towards pecuniary damages namely, medical charges, H y REKHA JAIN v. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. 1115 medicine expenses and other expenses; and Rs.6,000/- A towards non-pecuniary damages. The High Court reduced the pecuniary damages awarded towards medical expenses incurred by the appellant from Rs.17,51,726/- to Rs.7,77,000/-, and by awarding a further amount of Rs.6,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages, B awarded a total compensation of about Rs.14,000/-. In the instant appeals, the questions which arose for consideration were: 1) whether the High Court was justified ·in reducing the pecuniary damages awarded C towards medical expenses incurred by the appellant from· Rs.17,51,726/- to Rs.7,77,000/- and 2) whether the appellant was entitled to
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.