Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Victims of Car Accident with Permanent Disabilities

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has enhanced the compensation awarded to victims of a car accident who suffered permanent disabilities. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble Justice Abahy S. Oka and Hon'ble Justice Vikram Nath, arose from Civil Appeal Nos. 1241-1242 of 2023, originating from SLP (Civil) Nos. 7281-7282 of 2022.

The appellants, Chaus Taushif Alimiya and Saikh Taufik Mohammad Sokat, were traveling together in a Wagon-R car when it met with an accident in 2012, resulting in severe injuries to both individuals. They filed claims for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

The Tribunal awarded compensation based on the injuries and disabilities suffered by the appellants. Dissatisfied with the Tribunal's order, they appealed to the High Court, which partially allowed the appeals and enhanced the compensation. However, seeking further enhancement, the appellants approached the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 7281 of 2022 (Alimiya) and Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 7282 of 2022 (Sokat).

The Supreme Court examined the various heads of claims made by the appellants and carefully considered their medical conditions. After detailed deliberation, the Court approved and enhanced the compensation under several heads.

Under the head of "future medical expenses," the Court found the awarded amount for appellant Alimiya to be inadequate and increased it to Rs. 9,72,000/-, taking into account the need for long-term physiotherapy. For appellant Sokat, the future medical expenses were revised to Rs. 50,000/-.

Transportation charges were also revised. While the High Court had awarded Rs. 10,000/- for both appellants, the Supreme Court deemed it just to award Rs. 50,000/- to Alimiya and Rs. 25,000/- to Sokat, considering their respective disabilities.

The Court further increased the compensation for pain and suffering, loss of marriage prospects, and attendant charges, based on the appellants' medical conditions and the precedent set by previous judgments. Additionally, special diet and nourishment charges were awarded to both appellants, and a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was granted to each appellant for litigation expenses.

Justice Vikram Nath stated, "Considering the findings on the medical conditions of both the appellants, the amount awarded is less. Award of such compensation cannot be based on any mathematical formula, but has to be commensurate with the nature of suffering and pain, its extent, length, and duration."

The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and awarded additional compensation to the appellants along with the same interest as awarded by the High Court. The decision sets a precedent for fair and just compensation for victims of accidents resulting in permanent disabilities.

Date of Decision: February 16, 2023

CHAUS TAUSHIF ALIMIYA ETC.   vs MEMON MAHMMAD UMAR

Latest Legal News