Compensation for Motorcycle Accidents – Supreme Court awards Rs 15 Lakhs as compensation for ‘pain and suffering’ to 100% disability plaintiff

In connection with the motorcycle accident injury case, the Supreme Court recently analyzed the case law on “pain and suffering” (one of the main points under which damages are awarded to motorcycle accident victims) and increased the amount of damages awarded – more than was prayed for. for.

A bench of Judges CT Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol, allowing the appeal of the aggrieved appellant, damages of Rs.15 lakhs were awarded under the head “pain and suffering” even though the appellant had prayed for Rs.10 lakhs.

“Taking into account the above judgments, the injuries sustained, the ‘pain and suffering’ caused, and the lifelong nature of the disability afflicting the plaintiff-appellant, and the statement of the doctor as reproduced above, we find that the request of the plaintiff-appellant to be justified and as such award Rs.15,00,000/- under the head ‘pain and suffering’, fully aware of the fact that the prayer of the plaintiff-appellant for an increase of the compensation with an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-, we find the compensation just, fair and reasonable for the amount so awarded.”

Reviewing a plethora of judicial precedents and other scholarly material from various disciplines (bioethics, medical ethics, psycho-oncology, anesthesiology, philosophy, sociology), the Court found that a similarity emerged that one’s understanding of oneself ‘ has been shaken or damaged’. its root lies in the hands of persistent suffering.

“In the present facts, it is beyond dispute that the feeling that something is irreparably wrong in life, as expressed by Frank (supra); vulnerability and uselessness, as expressed by Edgar, is present and such a feeling will remain present for the rest of our lives. its natural life”it said.

To briefly summarize the facts of the case: the appellant was driving his company car when it collided with a carelessly driven container truck. He suffered from 90% permanent disability. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal fixed the functional disability of the appellant at 100% and held the insurance company liable to pay Rs.58,09,930/- with interest at 6% per annum (excluding future medical expenses of Rs.1.00. 000/-).

Both the appellant and the insurance company were aggrieved by the MACT order and appealed to the Karnataka High Court. The Supreme Court increased the amount of compensation from Rs.58,09,930/- to Rs.78,16,390/-. Challenging the High Court order, the appellant approached the High Court seeking enhancement of the damages awarded in the areas of future medical expenses, future prospects and pain and suffering.

The Supreme Court changed the award of damages on two counts: future prospects and ‘pain and suffering’. The total amount payable to the appellant was fixed at Rs.1,02,29,241/-.

In increasing the damages under the heading ‘pain and suffering’, the Court noted that there was no dispute as to the severity of the injuries sustained by the appellant and the long-lasting effects thereof on his life.

A doctor’s statement was taken into account, which showed that the appellant was wheelchair-bound, could not do any work, required assistance for all his daily activities and that the disability was likely to be permanent.

The Court further refers to the judgments in Kajal vs. Jagdish Chand (2020) 4 SCC 413, Ayush v Reliance General Insurance (2022) 7 SCC 738, en Lalan D. v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (2020) 9 SCC 805, where compensation under the heading ‘pain and suffering’ was enhanced and awarded in the range of Rs.3-15 lakhs.

The following excerpt from Karnataka SRTC v Mahadeva Shetty (2003) 7 SCC 197 was also struck from the judgment:

“18. A person not only suffers injuries due to an accident, but also suffers physically and mentally due to the accident throughout his life, and there is a feeling that he is no longer a normal person and cannot enjoy the facilities of life like any other normal person can. . In determining compensation for pain and suffering, as well as for loss of amenities, such characteristics as his age, marital status and any unusual hardships he has suffered in his life should be taken into account.”

Case Title: KS MURALIDHAR VERSUS R. SUBBULAKSHMI & ANR, SLP(C) No. 18337/2021

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 916

Click here to read the verdict