The Supreme Court significantly enhanced compensation awarded to a mason who lost his right leg in a road accident, holding that although his physical disability was assessed at 70%, his functional disability was 100% because he could no longer perform masonry work. The Court emphasized that compensation must reflect actual loss of earning capacity rather than merely the percentage of physical disability.
Courtroom Chronicles
SC CLARIFIES CULPABLE HOMICIDE UNDER SECTION 304 PART II IPC IN MATHU ALIAS JAGDISH CASE
The Supreme Court in Mathu Alias Jagdish v. State of Uttarakhand (2026) upheld the conviction under Section 304 IPC but altered the sentence to the period already undergone, holding that the case fell under Section 304 Part II as there was knowledge of likely death but no intention to cause death.
SUPREME COURT ON SECTION 304 PART II IPC, CULPABLE HOMICIDE AND SENTENCE REDUCTION
The Supreme Court held that the incident arose from a sudden altercation that resulted in the deceased falling into a dry canal and sustaining fatal injuries. While maintaining the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC, the Court reduced the sentence to the period already undergone considering the facts, evidence, age of the appellant, and the passage of nearly three decades.
SUPREME COURT ON FUNCTIONAL DISABILITY, PROSTHETIC LIMB COMPENSATION & MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
The Supreme Court held that a carpenter who lost his leg in a motor accident suffered 100% functional disability despite a 70% medical disability certificate. The Court enhanced compensation to ₹35.95 lakh and awarded ₹10 lakh towards future prosthetic limb replacement and maintenance costs.
SUPREME COURT ON MANDATORY INJUNCTION, ENCROACHMENT AND LIMITS OF SECOND APPEAL JURISDICTION
The Supreme Court held that a High Court cannot substitute a decree of mandatory injunction with monetary compensation when such relief was neither pleaded nor sought by the plaintiff. The Court emphasized adherence to Section 100 CPC and the requirement of substantial questions of law in second appeals.
SUPREME COURT DECLARES RIGHT TO WALK AND FOOTPATH AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT
In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court recognized the Right to Walk on safe and demarcated footpaths as a Fundamental Right under the Constitution and directed authorities to ensure pedestrian infrastructure while awarding enhanced compensation to the victim’s family.