In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has enhanced the compensation awarded to a motor accident victim, observing that courts must strive to provide “full and fair compensation” to those who have suffered due to the negligence of others. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prasanna B. Varale, significantly increased the compensation from ₹27.21 lakh, as awarded by the High Court, to ₹48 lakh, matching the claimant’s original plea.
Case Background
The case revolved around Atul Tiwari, a B.Tech student, who suffered severe injuries, including 60% permanent disability, in a road accident on October 3, 2009. While traveling with a friend on a motorcycle, their vehicle was struck by a negligently driven truck on the wrong side of the road. The injuries left Tiwari permanently disabled, affecting his speech and mobility, and requiring multiple surgeries and extensive therapy.
Tiwari initially filed a claim for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) in Bhopal, which awarded him ₹19.43 lakh. Dissatisfied, Tiwari appealed for an enhancement, while the respondent, Oriental Insurance Company Limited, sought a reduction. The Madhya Pradesh High Court partially allowed Tiwari’s appeal, enhancing his compensation to ₹27.21 lakh, but he pursued further relief in the Supreme Court.
Legal Issues and Arguments
The primary issues before the court included:
– The adequacy of compensation under various heads, including loss of income, future medical expenses, and attendant care.
– The assessment of permanent disability as 60% and its impact on Tiwari’s earning capacity.
– The appropriateness of a 40% addition for future prospects, as against the 50% argued by the appellant, citing the decision in Sidram v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd..
Senior Advocate Anil Lala, representing Tiwari, argued for enhanced compensation, emphasizing that the High Court undervalued his future earning potential and neglected expenses for long-term medical care. The insurance company, represented by Advocate K.P. Soni, countered that the compensation was fair and in line with judicial precedents.
Supreme Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court noted deficiencies in the High Court’s evaluation, particularly regarding future medical expenses and non-pecuniary damages. The bench referred to precedents such as National Insurance Co. v. Pranay Sethi and Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar to underline the principles of “just compensation.”
The court observed, “Money cannot substitute a life lost or irreparably altered, but courts must ensure that victims are compensated adequately for their suffering and the opportunities lost due to the negligence of others.”
Justice Varale remarked, “It is well accepted that perfect compensation is hardly possible, but the court must ensure the victim receives full and fair compensation for the harm suffered.”
Judgment Highlights
The Supreme Court enhanced the total compensation to ₹48 lakh, reasoning as follows:
1. Loss of Income: The court upheld the High Court’s multiplier-based calculation but increased the notional monthly income to ₹20,000, reflecting Tiwari’s potential as a B.Tech student.
2. Future Medical Expenses: Acknowledging the prolonged need for speech and physiotherapy, the court overruled the lower courts’ limited awards under these heads.
3. Attendant and Transportation Costs: The bench approved a lifetime provision for attendant care and enhanced travel expenses, considering the rising costs of medical care and transportation.
4. Non-Pecuniary Damages: The court increased compensation for pain, suffering, and loss of amenities, citing the victim’s irreversible loss of speech and quality of life.
Case Details
– Case Title: Atul Tiwari v. Regional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
– Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 151 of 2025 (@ SLP (Civil) No. 24205 of 2022)
– Bench: Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
