Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

In a rare case, the Supreme Court recently invoked its extraordinary power to do complete justice by awarding a lump sum compensation of Rs 15 lakh, in addition to the paltry Rs 1,72,000 awarded to a girl who suffered 50% partial permanent disability due to injuries and lost her mother at the age of 5 years in an unfortunate road accident in 2010.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh allowed an appeal filed by minor M Pradeesha, represented by her father to this extent, as her counsel contended that her disability has unfortunately further increased and, as a result of the injuries on her right leg, thigh, and from knee to ankle, she has lost stability of the leg.

The accident took place on August 22, 2010, when the appellant, her mother, and some more persons were travelling in a TATA Ace Van from south to north on the Tambaram-Maduravoyal Bye Pass Road, when the van hit a stationary lorry.

It was alleged that the lorry was parked in the middle of the road on the Porur Lake Bridge without any signal or indicator. The mother of the appellant sustained multiple fractures and injuries and died in the hospital. The appellant, who was 5 years old at that time, also sustained injuries. As per the medical certificate produced on behalf of the appellant before the tribunal, which had been accepted by the high court as well, she was found to have suffered 50% partial permanent disability.  

Her counsel said though the appellant – a brave girl – was pursuing her academic pursuits, as a result of the nature of the disability, it could hardly be disputed that the academic career of the appellant had been adversely impacted; her employment prospects had also been adversely affected; her personal life too was badly impaired as she required constant assistance for movements; her marriage prospects also were not be as bright as they would have been had she been hale and hearty; the appellant had suffered not only physical pain but unmeasurable mental agony as well; she required special food and nourishment to keep herself physically fit for her day-to-day routine; and the appellant had lost many amenities and the basic enjoyment of life.   

But for the permanent disability, the counsel said, the appellant would have availed greater opportunities of going for higher education in institutes of eminence and become self-dependent. 

"The resultant effect is that, throughout her life, she will not be able to earn the livelihood which a person of her age group with normal health conditions would be able to earn. These losses cannot be measured exactly in monetary terms for the purpose of assessing the compensation. The appellant, of course, deserves to be suitably compensated so as to enable her to meet the day to day charges incurred on medical attendant, food, and other basic amenities," advocate P B Sashaankh submitted. On this premise, he urged that the appellant ought to have been granted compensation of Rs 32 lakhs.

The appellant challenged the validity of the award of October 31, 2013, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, as well as the impugned judgment of the high court dated March 23, 2017, in terms whereof she was granted compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, only to the tune of Rs 1,72,000 along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.

The insurance companies vehemently opposed the appellant’s claim, contending that the partial permanent disability had not caused a severe impediment to the appellant in pursuing her academic or professional career and securing employment based upon such qualification. They submitted that the disability certificate produced before the apex court could not be relied upon and that, as per the certificate which was produced before the tribunal, the compensation had been rightly assessed.     

"Having heard counsel for the parties and on perusal of the disability certificate, coupled with other relevant factors, we are satisfied that instead of assessing compensation under different heads, it is a fit case to invoke our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant lump sum suitable amount of compensation to the appellant," the bench said.

In addition to the compensation already awarded, the court said, the appellant would be entitled to a lump sum compensation of Rs 15 lakhs, which would be paid by the insurance companies in the same ratio as had been fixed by the tribunal and the high court.

"However, if the insurance companies fail to make such payment within 90 days, the appellant shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of the impugned judgment of the High Court till actual payment thereof," the bench said. 

Disposing of the appeal, the court clarified that the insurance companies would be free to recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle in terms of the liberty already granted by the tribunal/high court.

Case Title: M Pradeesha (Minor) [Rep By Father M Munuswamy] Vs K Srinivasan & Ors