SUPREME COURT RULING ON COMPENSATION ASSESSMENT FOR MOTOR ACCIDENT VICTIMS

ASPECTS	DETAILS
Case Title	Sanjay Rajpoot vs. Ram Singh & Ors. (2025 INSC 188)
Introduction	The case involves a motor accident claim where the appellant, a 23-year-old, sought enhanced compensation after suffering an amputation. The dispute was over the correct assessment of income, disability percentage, and compensation amount.
Factual Background	On April 3, 2018, the appellant was hit by a rashly driven vehicle, leading to severe injuries and amputation of his right leg. He sought ₹67,00,000 as compensation, citing loss of livelihood.
Legal Issues	Whether the compensation awarded was adequate. Whether the functional disability should be considered at 90%. Whether the multiplier and monthly income were correctly applied.
Applicable Law	Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Sarla Verma vs. DTC (2009) 6 SCC 121 National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680 Mohd. Sabeer vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corp (2022)
Analysis	The Supreme Court found that the lower courts underestimated the appellant’s disability and income. The Court corrected the age to 22 years, applied an 18x multiplier, and fixed functional disability at 90%. It also acknowledged loss of marriage prospects, pain, and suffering.
Conclusion	The Supreme Court increased compensation to ₹28,93,494, correcting errors in age, income assessment, and disability percentage. The appeal was allowed, ensuring fair compensation.
Current Scenario	The judgment sets a precedent for assessing self-employed individuals’ disability and income accurately, ensuring justice in similar cases.

ASPECTS

DETAILS

Case Title

Sanjay Rajpoot vs. Ram Singh & Ors. (2025 INSC 188)

Introduction

The case involves a motor accident claim where the appellant, a 23-year-old, sought enhanced compensation after suffering an amputation. The dispute was over the correct assessment of income, disability percentage, and compensation amount.

Factual Background

On April 3, 2018, the appellant was hit by a rashly driven vehicle, leading to severe injuries and amputation of his right leg. He sought ₹67,00,000 as compensation, citing loss of livelihood.

Legal Issues

Whether the compensation awarded was adequate.
Whether the functional disability should be considered at 90%.
Whether the multiplier and monthly income were correctly applied.

Applicable Law

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Sarla Verma vs. DTC (2009) 6 SCC 121
National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680
Mohd. Sabeer vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corp (2022)

Analysis

The Supreme Court found that the lower courts underestimated the appellant’s disability and income. The Court corrected the age to 22 years, applied an 18x multiplier, and fixed functional disability at 90%. It also acknowledged loss of marriage prospects, pain, and suffering.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court increased compensation to ₹28,93,494, correcting errors in age, income assessment, and disability percentage. The appeal was allowed, ensuring fair compensation.

Current Scenario

The judgment sets a precedent for assessing self-employed individuals’ disability and income accurately, ensuring justice in similar cases.