SC awards Rs 1.41 crore compensation to Coma patient bedridden for 8 years

This amount will carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till realization, clarified the court.

Such observations came from the top court bench comprising of Justice M.R. Shah and B. V. Nagarathna after it took note of the fact that "The pain, suffering and trauma suffered by the claimant cannot be compensated in terms of the money. However, still it will be a solace to award suitable compensation under different heads including the pain, shock and suffering, loss of amenities and happiness of life."

The case concerned a patient who had met with an accident on 01.01.2013 and had sustained grievous brain injuries. After undergoing brain surgery, even though he got discharged from the hospital, he remained in coma.

Before the accident took place, the patient was working as a Process Supervisor in a multinational Investment Bank. After the accident, the claimant through his mother filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal which awarded Rs 94,37,300 along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

Also Read: Pediatrician gets Refund, Compensation for Failed Lipo Suction Slimming Treatment

Dissatisfied with this judgment, the Insurance Company, along with the original claimant preferred appeals before the Karnataka High Court. Partly allowing the complaint, the High Court enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs 1,24,94,333. However, the High Court reduced the interest from 9% per annum as awarded by the learned Tribunal to the interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

Feeling aggrieved, the original claimant preferred the appeal before the Supreme Court seeking an enhancement of the amount of compensation.

The counsel appearing for the claimant submitted before the top court that the High Court had committed a grave error in awarding Rs 2 lakh only under the head pain and suffering and Rs 1 lakh only under the head of loss of future amenities and happiness.

Therefore, he prayed for enhancing the amount awarded for pain and suffering as the period of hospitalization, the grievous brain injuries sustained by the claimant and the fact that he underwent multiple operations.

It was further submitted that in that vehicular accident the claimant had suffered 100% disability and is completely bedridden and with this disability, he will have to live a miserable life till death. Therefore the HC committed error in awarding Rd 1 lakh only towards loss of amenities and happiness and further reducing the amount of interest from 9% per annum to 6% per annum, contended the claimant's counsel.

Opposing the appeal, the counsel appearing for the Insurance Company relied on Supreme Court decision in the case of Raj Kumar vs. Ajay Kumar and Anr., wherein the top court had held that when compensation is awarded by treating the loss of future earning capacity as 100% the need to award compensation separately under the head of loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life may disappear and as a result, only a token or nominal amount may have to be awarded under the head of loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life, as otherwise there may be a duplication in the award of compensation.

After considering the submissions made by both the parties, the court noted that after the accident, the claimant was hospitalized for a number of months and he had undergone MRI,CT scans and X-rays. He had sustained right temporal SDH, multiple hemorrhagic contusions on temporal lobe, left parieto­occipital lobe, left parietal lobe and bilateral frontal lobe, hemorrhagic contusions left thalamic region s/o grade II diffuse axonal injury, moderate SAH in right sylvian cistern, moderate diffuse cerebral edema, multiple comminuted and variably depressed fracture in left squamous temporal and left parietal bone, bilateral occipital bone fracture, right sub­occipital SDH. Finally diagnosed that traumatic brain injury sequelae­s/p frontotemporoparietal hemicraniectomy and right lower limb deep vein thrombosis.

Later, the claimant was shifted to Brain & Spine Centre, Chemmanakary, Kerala, and he was still in coma and is totally bedridden.

Agreeing with the claimant's counsel, the top court held the compensation awarded by HC to be wrong, and noted, "Considering the prolonged hospitalization and medical treatment and that the claimant underwent multiple surgeries, we are of the opinion that the High Court has erred in awarding Rs.2,00,000/­ only under the head pain and suffering."

"The pain, suffering and trauma suffered by the claimant cannot be compensated in terms of the money. However, still it will be a solace to award suitable compensation under different heads including the pain, shock and suffering, loss of amenities and happiness of life," further noted the court.

Enhancing the amount of compensation, the top court noted, "In the facts and circumstances of the case due to the prolonged hospitalization and the multiple brain injuries/injuries sustained by the claimant and that he is still in coma and is bedridden, we are of the opinion that if the amount of compensation under the head of pain, shock and suffering is enhanced to Rs.10,00,000/­ (Rupees Ten Lakhs), it can be said to be a reasonable amount under the head pain, shock and suffering."

Further the supreme court also enhanced the amount awarded under the head of loss of amenities and happiness and noted, "no amount can compensate the loss of amenities and happiness more particularly a person who is in coma since number of years and is bedridden for the entire life."

"In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that if the amount of compensation under the head loss of amenities and happiness is enhanced to Rs.10,00,000/­ (Rupees Ten Lakhs) from that of Rs.1,00,000/­ as awarded by the High Court, it can be said to be a reasonable amount under the head loss of amenities and happiness," noted the court.

Placing reliance on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Raj Kumar and Lalan D. alias Lal, the top court opined that there cannot be straight jacket for formula for the amount of compensation awarded under the heads, pain and suffering and loss of amenities and happiness. It depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case and varies from person to person who has suffered due to the accident.

"Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case when the claimant is in coma even after a period of eight long years and that he will have to be permanently bedridden during his entire life, as observed above the amount of compensation awarded under the head loss of amenities and happiness of Rs.1,00,000/­ only is unreasonable and meagre," noted the court.

However, the top court didn't increase the amount of interest and observed, "Now so far as the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court reducing the amount of interest from 9% to 6% per annum is concerned, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the same is not required to be interfered with by this Court in exercise of powers under Article 136 of the Constitution of India."

So modifying the High Court's order, the top court awarded the original claimant Rs 1,41,94,333/­ with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till realization.