Sunday, 2 February 2025

Supreme Court: Burden of proof in motor accident claim petition is on respondent to show that after accident victim is earning money by doing another work

 In light of the aforesaid decisions, we find it extremely difficult to uphold the decision of the High Court and the Tribunal based on the finding that the loss of the Appellant's earning capacity as a result of the amputation of his left leg was only 50%. It is noted above that the Appellant used to earn his livelihood as a cart puller. The Tribunal has found that at the time of the accident his age was 55 years. At that age it would be impossible for the Appellant to find any job. From the trend of cross-examination it appears that an attempt was made to suggest that notwithstanding the loss of one leg the Appellant could still do some work sitting down such as selling vegetables. It is all very well to theoretically talk about a cart puller changing his work and becoming a vegetable vendor. But the computation of compensation payable to a victim of motor accident who suffered some serious permanent disability resulting from the loss of a limb etc. should not take into account such indeterminate factors. Any scaling down of the compensation should require something more tangible than a hypothetical conjecture that notwithstanding the disability, the victim could make up for the loss of income by changing his vocation or by adopting another means of livelihood. The party advocating for a lower amount of compensation for that reason must plead and show before the Tribunal that the victim enjoyed some legal protection (as in the case of persons covered by The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995) or in case of the vast multitude who earn their livelihood in the unorganized sector by leading cogent evidence that the victim had in fact changed his vocation or the means of his livelihood and by virtue of such change he was deriving a certain income. {Para 10}

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 237 of 2012.

Decided On: 10.01.2012

Mohan Soni Vs. Ram Avtar Tomar and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Aftab Alam and R.M. Lodha, JJ.

Author: Aftab Alam, J.

Citation: AIR 2012 SUPREME COURT 782, 2012 (2) SCC 267,MANU/SC/0011/2012.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

No comments:

Post a Comment