A feeling that something is deeply wrong will stay with him for the rest of his life: The Supreme Court increases compensation for ‘pain and suffering’ for a motor accident victim who is 100% disabled.

The Supreme Court has granted Rs 15 lakh for ‘pain and suffering’ in a motor accident case where the victim is 100% disabled. The court noted that the victim will feel a lasting sense of something fundamentally wrong in life. This appeal was based on a decision from the Karnataka High Court regarding the accident. The High Court’s Miscellaneous First Appeal challenged the Tribunal’s Award. The Division Bench, including Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol, referenced thoughts from Calgary University Professor Arthur W. Frank and Cardiff University Reader Emeritus Andrew Edgar. They highlighted that while different fields define pain and suffering uniquely, a common theme is that ongoing suffering deeply affects a person’s self-understanding. In this case, it is clear that the victim experiences a profound sense of vulnerability and futility, which will persist throughout his life.

The incident occurred in 2008 when the appellant was in his company vehicle heading to work. The vehicle was involved in a collision with a container lorry, which was reportedly driven recklessly. The injuries led to a claim of 90% permanent disability from the claimant-appellant before the Tribunal. The Tribunal was informed that the claimant-appellant worked as a laborer at L.M. Glassfibre (India) Pvt. Ltd., earning a monthly salary of Rs.28,221/-. In addition to this job, he was also an agent for the Life Insurance Corporation of India, making an annual commission between Rs.30,000/- and Rs.40,000/-. The Tribunal determined that the lorry was driven recklessly and ordered Respondent-New India Assurance Company Limited to pay Rs.58,09,930 with 6% interest per year, excluding future medical costs of Rs.1,00,000. When the case went to the High Court, the total compensation was raised to Rs.78,16,390, compared to the Tribunal’s amount.

The appellant argued that the High Court made a mistake by calculating future earnings at 40% instead of 50%, as stated in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680. He also claimed that the compensation for ‘pain and suffering’ was too low given his 100% functional disability. It was noted that the claimant-appellant had a permanent job, so future income loss should be calculated at 50%. The Apex Court supported both the Tribunal and the High Court in recognizing the claimant-appellant’s disability as 100%. Considering the injuries, the pain endured, and the lifelong disability, along with the doctor’s statement, the Bench found the claimant-appellant’s request to be reasonable.

The Bench granted Rs. 15,00,000 for ‘pain and suffering’, noting that the claimant-appellant requested an increase of Rs. 10,00,000. The appeal was accepted, and the Bench stated, “We have changed the High Court’s Award on two points: future prospects and ‘pain and suffering’. The increased amount will earn interest at 6% from the date the petition for special leave to appeal was filed. As mentioned in paragraph 10, the total compensation is now set at Rs. 87,29,241/-. After considering ‘pain and suffering’, the final amount due is Rs. 1,02,29,241/-.”

Cause Title: K.S. Muralidhar v. R. Subbulakshmi & Anr. [Neutral Citation- 2024 INSC 886]
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocate Rohan Thawani, AOR Pooja Dhar
Respondents: AOR T. Mahipal, Advocates Rohit Kumar Sinha & Sanjay Kumar Singh