SARNAM SINGH versus SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS

Citation: [2023] 9 S.C.R. 1182 · Decided: 04-07-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY S. OKA
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1182
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 9 S.C.R.
1182
SARNAM SINGH
v.
SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No.3900 of 2023)
JULY 4, 2023
[ABHAY S. OKA AND RAJESH BINDAL, JJ.]
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Motor Accident – Permanent
disability of an injured affecting his functional disability –
Compensation – Assessment of – Held:Any physical disability
resulting from an accident has to be judged with reference to the
nature of the work being performed by the person who suffered
disability – On facts, the gunman employed with the company met
with an accident resulting in 85% disability on account of amputation
of his right lower limb, and pursuant thereto, his services were
terminated on account of his inability to discharge his duties –
Tribunal rightly assessed the loss of earning capacity of the claimant
at 100% and the High Court erred in reducing it to 80%, thus,
order passed by the High Court set aside and that of tribunal
restored.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Any physical disability resulting from an accident
has to be judged with reference to the nature of the work being
performed by the person who suffered disability. The same injury
suffered by two different persons may affect them in different
ways. Loss of leg by a farmer or a rickshaw puller may be end of
the road as far as his earning capacity is concerned. Whereas, in
case of the persons engaged in some kind of desk work in office,
loss of leg may have lesser effect. [Para 9][1186-B-C]
1.2 The appellant was working as a gunman with the
company. On account of amputation of his right leg above the
knee, he was terminated from service. It is not a matter of dispute
that a person with his right leg amputated cannot perform the
duty of a gunman. This is his functional disability. He was 50 years
& 5 months old at the time of accident. Considering the said
[2023] 9 S.C.R. 1182 : 2023 INSC 597
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1183
facts, the tribunal was right in assessing the loss of earning
capacity of the appellant at 100% and assessing the compensation
accordingly. The High Court was in error in reducing the loss of
earning capacity to 80%, relying upon the judgment of High Court,
despite there being a judgment of this Court available on the
issue. The High Court also erred in calculating the compensation.
The compensation awarded by the tribunal was taken on
 33,34,800/-. Reducing a sum of 
 4,92,205/- therefrom, the
compensation was assessed at 
 28,43,000/- (rounded off).
However, total compensation awarded by the tribunal was
  34,29,800/- and not   33,34,800/- The impugned order passed
by the High Court is set aside and the award passed by the tribunal
is restored.[Para 10, 11][1186-C-G]
Mohan Soni vs. Ram Avtar Tomar And Others (2012) 2
SCC 267 : [2012] 2 SCR 921 – relied on.
Case Law Reference
[2012] 2 SCR 921
relied on
Para 10
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.3900
of 2023.
From the Judgment and Order dated 25.08.2017 of the High Court
of Delhi at New Delhi in MACA No.461 of 2016.
Miss. Geetanjali Mohan, K. K. Mohan, Mrs. Geetanjali Mohan,
Advs. for the Appellant.
Ms. Meenakshi Midha, Garv Singh, Chander Shekhar Ashri, Advs.
for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
RAJESH BINDAL, J.
1. Aggrieved against the order passed by the Delhi High Court in
MAC.APP.461/2016 dated August 25, 2017, the appellant has filed the
present appeal before this court.
2. The appellant met with an accident on 24.11.2013 with Tempo
bearing registration number UP 79T 1948. As a result of which he
suffered injuries. He remained hospitalised from 24.11.2013 to 05.01.2014,
for a period of around one month and ten days. Thereafter he remained
SARNAM SINGH v. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO.
LTD. & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1184
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 9 S.C.R.
under follow-up treatment for about a year. He suffered 85% disability
in relation to his right lower limb as the same had to be amputated. The
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South District, Saket New Delhi, (for
short ‘the Tribunal’) vide its award dated 18.4.2016, awarded a
compensation of  34,29,800/-. As the vehicle was insured, the liability
was put on the insurance company. The Tribunal while assessing the
compensation had awarded a sum of  1,50,000/- on account of pain
andsuffering,  95,000/- on account of diet, conveyance and attendant
charges. In addition, a sum of   1,00,000/- was awarded on account of
loss of amenities. The appellant was working as gunman
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.