The Supreme Court has increased the compensation for a woman who lost her sight and suffered serious pelvic injuries in a 2011 road accident. The awarded amount has been raised from ₹ 2.94 crore to ₹ 3.77 crore. The court ruled that her ongoing employment should not be considered evidence that her ability to earn has remained intact.
A career-growth letter issued by her employer showed that she had lost out on opportunities to progress to higher positions, including general manager, director and vice-president. The Court took into account the effect of the injuries on her future career progression. “The calculation of functional disability depends on assessing the victim’s earning capacity in the open, competitive market, rather than on retention in a specific, highly accommodated role.
Evidence before the High Court, specifically the Career Growth Letter dated 06.02.2018 from her employer, confirmed that the Claimant lost out on her normal career growth and promotional progression, including advancement to the positions of General Manager, Director, or Vice President, as a result of the accident. Applying this principle, the Court enhanced the compensation payable to a woman who was rendered completely blind and suffered severe pelvic injuries and a permanent colostomy in a road accident in 2011, raising the amount from ₹ 2.94 crore awarded by the Punjab and Haryana High Court to ₹ 3.77 crore. The Supreme Court accordingly treated her functional disability as 100%, rather than the 80% assessed by the High Court, after taking into account the Medical Board’s finding of 100% permanent physical impairment of the whole body.
In a judgment passed on Thursday, a bench of Justices SVN Bhatti and NV Anjaria held that assessment of functional disability in motor accident compensation cases must focus on a victim’s ability to earn in the “open, competitive labour market,” rather than merely on the fact that the person continues to retain a job in a “highly accommodated” workplace. The Supreme Court noted this and said that her return to work after her accident, thus, could not by itself be taken to mean that her earning capacity had remained unaffected. The record further indicates that she is able to perform her current duties only through specially created software, flexible working hours, and extreme accommodations provided by her employer as an act of corporate compassion,” SC said.
