Gujarat High Court
New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Mithubhai Bhurabhai Jogi on 9 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4514 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
==========================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
Yes
==========================================
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD
Versus
MITHUBHAI BHURABHAI JOGI & ANR.
==========================================
Appearance:
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR MEHUL S SHAH(772) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 09/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Present appeal is filed by the appellant (original opponent No.2) under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter be referred to as "the Act") against the judgment and award dated 24.06.2008 passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Labour Court, Kutch at Bhuj in Workman Compensation (Non Fatal) Case No. 29 of 1997 whereby the learned Commissioner has allowed the claim petition and directed the original opponents No.1 and 2 jointly and severally to pay compensation at Page 1 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined Rs.2,36,472/- with 9% interest from the date of accident till realization and further directed insurance company to pay penalty at the rate of 50% of the awarded amount.
2. Facts of the present case are that the respondent - claimant was on duty on 04.05.1996 and going from Panandhro to Mithapur in a truck bearing Registration No.GQY-4846 and driving the truck on the left hand side of the road with moderate and controllable speed. It is alleged that around 3.00 hours on the said day, when the said truck had reached at the place of accident at that time the truck met with an accident, due to which the claimant sustained serious injuries over the different parts of the body resulting into permanent disablement and he became incapable to do any work. The claimant had preferred the aforesaid claim petition claiming Rs.3,98,608/- before the learned Commissioner, which came to be allowed.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, the appellant - insurance company has preferred this appeal.
4. Heard Mr.Palak Thakkar, learned counsel for the appellant - insurance company and Mr.Vishal Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent - claimant at length. Perused the material produced on record.
5. Mr.Thakkar, learned counsel for the appellant - insurance company has submitted that the learned Commissioner has considered the disability sustained by the claimant, which is on very higher side. He has submitted that there was no employee and employer relationship, however, without considering the same, the Page 2 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined learned Commissioner has awarded the compensation to the tune of Rs.2,36,472/- along with 9% interest and 50% penalty. He has submitted that so far as the liability of penalty is concerned, the learned Commissioner has fastened the same upon original opponent No.1. He has submitted that the learned Commissioner has committed serious error in considering the case of the claimant and there was no sufficient evidence produced before the learned Commissioner with regard to the employee and employer relationship, however, the learned Commissioner has passed the impugned judgment and award. He has submitted that the learned Commissioner has not considered the fact that the policy is under the Motor Vehicle Act and not under the Workmen's Compensation Act and thus, the liability is not from the date of accident but the same is from the date of filing of the application. He has submitted that since the claim petition was filed after almost a year from the date of accident and, therefore, the liability to pay the interest was fastened upon the appellant - insurance company from the date of accident is incorrect. Mr.Thakkar, learned counsel has submitted that the learned Commissioner has committed an error of facts and law in considering 100% functional disability and thus, the same is required to be quashed. He has submitted that the learned Commissioner has committed jurisdictional error and, therefore, it involves sufficient questions of law and, therefore, the present appeal is maintainable.
5.1 Mr.Thakkar, learned counsel has submitted the appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and award raises the substantial questions of law, which reads as under:-
(1) Whether the insurer can at all be made liable to satisfy the award made in favour of the applicant / claimant in a claim Page 3 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923?
(2) Whether the decree can at all the made against the insurer in a proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923? (3) Whether the insurer can at all be joined or impleaded as a party in proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923?
(4) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the disability of the applicant / claimant can be assessed at 100% when the Doctors assessment of his disability was only 59%? (5) Whether the insurer can at all be held liable for payment of interest from the date of the accident till realization to the applicant / claimant in a claim under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923?
(6) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant / claimant was able to prove that he was an employee of the present respondent No.2 Shri Lakha Karshan Gadhvi?
(7) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, bhatha or daily allowance of Rs.60/- can at all be taken as a part of the salary / wages earned by the applicant / claimant for the purpose of calculating workman's compensation?
5.2 Mr.Thakkar, learned counsel has submitted that out of the said substantial questions, two were considered as substantial questions of law and in view of the facts of the case, though the Court has not framed the questions of law while admitting the appeal. He has emphasized upon the questions of law as mentioned in para - 5 of the appeal memo and submitted that the appeal is maintainable and the same deserves to be allowed and the impugned judgment and award deserves to be quashed and set aside.
Page 4 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined
6. Mr.Vishal Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent - claimant has submitted that the injured sustained injury when he was on duty as driver and the vehicular accident occurred on 05.05.1996 while he was going towards Jamnagar Lalpur road and at that time, the vehicular accident took place and because of the accident, the claimant sustained injury permanent in nature and is shortening of his leg which is permanent functional disability and the Commissioner has rightly considered 100% disablement considering vocational work which is undertaken by the claimant, for which, he is unable to drive vehicle in future. Mr.Mehta, learned counsel has submitted that in view of the recent decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as this Court, the disability is required to be considered from their function and, therefore, the learned Commissioner has rightly considered the disability in its true and proper perspective and, there is no any illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment and award and thus, the appeal being meritless deserves to be dismissed.
6.1 Mr.Mehta, learned counsel has submitted that so far as the employer and employee relationship is concerned, the same is rightly established by the learned Commissioner and discussed the said fact in issues No.1 and 2 and even the claimant has produced relevant medical evidence before the Court with regard to disablement and, therefore, there is no any infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Commissioner. He has submitted that so far as the interest is concerned, since the policy is under the Motor Vehicle Act, therefore, the liability to pay the interest is on insurance company but that is not from the date of accident but the same is from the date of filing of the application. He has submitted that so far as the penalty is concerned, it was rightly held Page 5 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined by the learned Commissioner upon original opponent No.1 and, therefore, there is no any infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgment and award.
7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both the sides and the facts and circumstances of the case, the issues involved in the present appeal are that whether the learned Commissioner has committed any error while passing the impugned judgment and award and whether the appeal is maintainable under Section 30 of the Act. It appears from the judgment and award that the learned Commissioner, after considering the fact that the claimant while driving the vehicle met with an accident, for which documentary evidence was produced, has rightly fastened the liability upon the appellant to pay the compensation. The claimant has produced the medical evidence including the treatment taken in Irwin Hospital and private doctor. From the documentary evidence, it establishes that the claimant sustained injury because of the vehicular accident and he was immediately treated at G. K. General Hospital and, thereafter, he was referred to Irwin Hospital at Jamnagar where he was admitted as an indoor patient for a period of almost 29 days and, thereafter, he was discharged from the hospital and this OPD treatment was undertaken for three months by the respondent. It was mentioned in the certificate issued by Dr. Abhinav Kotak that the claimant sustained permanent disablement in nature by shortening his leg and he is unable to drive the vehicle in future and considering permanent functional disability of 100% there was no any contrary evidence produced by the insurance company before the learned Commissioner. Therefore, after considering the facts and medical evidence, the learned Commissioner has rightly considered the disablement of 100% and, hence, the learned Commissioner has not Page 6 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined committed any error in passing the impugned judgment and award. The permanent disablement was considered at 59% body as a whole, the same was considered to be 100% since the claimant was working as a driver and now he is unable to drive the vehicle in future. In view of such facts, I am of the opinion that there is no any infirmity or illegality committed by the learned Commissioner while passing the impugned judgment and award. It is pertinent to note that so far as the vehicle policy is concerned, the same is under the Motor Vehicles Act and not under the Workmen's Compensation Act and so far as the liability is concerned, the same is upon the insurance company and the penalty is concerned, it is rightly fastened upon original opponent No.1. In the present case, it is further clarified that since the policy under the Motor Vehicles Act, the interest under Section 4(A)(1) of the Act is not applicable, therefore, the liability to pay the interest is not from the date of accident but the same is from the date of filing of the application.
8. In the case of Sarnam Singh Vs. Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd, (2023) 8 SCC 193 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held and observed in para - 10 as under:-
"10. As to how compensation, in case where permanent disability of an injured affects his functional disability, is to be assessed has been considered by this Court, repeatedly. Reference can be made to the judgment of this Court in Mohan Soni vs. Ram Avtar Tomar And Others, (2012) 2 SCC 267. In the aforesaid case the injured was working as a cart puller. As a result of the accident, his left leg was amputated. His permanent disability was assessed at 60%. The Tribunal assessed the compensation taking the loss of earning at 50% on the theory that he can still do some other work while sitting. The High Court did not disturb the finding regarding loss of income on account of disability. This Court found that the Tribunal was in error in taking the loss of earning at 50% as the injured was 55 years of age and it may be difficult for him to find a job at that stage. In fact, any physical disability resulting from an Page 7 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined accident has to be judged with reference to the nature of the work being performed by the person who suffered disability. The same injury suffered by two different persons may affect them in different ways. Loss of leg by a farmer or a rickshaw puller may be end of the road as far as his earning capacity is concerned. Whereas, in case of the persons engaged in some kind of desk work in office, loss of leg may have lesser effect. This Court enhanced the loss of earning capacity from 50% to 90%."
9. In the case of Chandramma Vs. Manager, Regional Officer, NCC Limited, (2023) 2 SCC 144, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clarified analyse meaning of compensation awarded in cases where the victim has suffered permanent partial disability by analysing the situation in paras - 10 to 19 which read as under:-
"10. Before adverting to the merits of the case, it is necessary to analyse the meaning of compensation awarded in cases where the victim has suffered permanent partial disability. In common parlance, compensation is often described as "something, typically money, awarded to someone in recognition of loss, suffering or injury". Under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, it is mandatory for the employers to pay compensation to their employees or workmen for a work-related accident, fatality, injury, or illness. The Objective of the 1923 Act is two-fold. First, it enables employees and their dependents to get compensation from their employers in case an accident causes an employee's death or disability; second, it mandates employers to pay compensation to their workers if they contract certain job-related illnesses or diseases.
11. In relation to the above objective, it is essential to advert to Section 3 of the 1923 Act which states that an employer is liable to pay damages to its workers under the following conditions:
i. If a worker has an occupational disease mentioned under Part A, B, C of Schedule III. The disease has to be a result of an injury by accident during work hours.
ii. An injury sustained by an employee during work that leads to total or partial disability iii. Death of an employee due to a work-related hazard.
Page 8 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined
12. Ideally, the compensation should be provided to the employees against the hazards of employment to which an employee is exposed. This also includes any occupational disease or industrial accident that the employee may encounter arising out of or during the course of employment which leads to disability or death. Specifically, a worker is entitled to compensation in case of
(i) Death
(ii) Permanent Total Disablement
(iii) Permanent Partial Disablement
(i) Temporary disablement- both total and partial, and
(v) It has contracted an occupational disease.
13. "Disablement" is a wide term and under the 1923 Act, it is divided into two categories ie., Partial disablement and total disablement. According to Section 2(1) (g) of the Act 'Partial Disablement' means, where the disablement is of a temporary nature, such disablement reduces the earning capacity of an employee in any employment in which he was engaged at the time of the accident resulting in the disablement, and, where the disablement is of a permanent nature, such disablement as reduces his earning capacity in every employment which he was capable of undertaking at that time. Thus, Section 2(1) (g) classifies partial disablement into two kinds, namely, (a) Temporary partial disablement and, (b) Permanent partial disablement.
14. The distinction between the two types of partial disablement depends on the fact whether the disablement results in reduction of earning capacity in the particular employment in which he was engaged at the time of the accident or in all employment which the employee was capable of doing. In the former case the partial disablement is called temporary and in the latter case permanent.
Every injury specified in Part Il of Schedule I of the Employees' Compensation Act shall be deemed to result in permanent partial disablement.
15. Whereas, "Total Disablement" is defined under Section 2(1)(l) to mean such disablement whether of a temporary or permanent nature as incapacitates a workman for all work which he was capable of performing at the time of accident resulting in such disablement and every injury specified in Part I of Schedule I or combination of injuries specified in Part II of Schedule I where aggregate percentage, as specified in Part II against those injuries amounts to 100% or more.
16. Total disablement is of two types:
Page 9 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined (I) Temporary Total Disablement- In temporary total disablement the earning capacity of a workman is lost for a temporary period, for all work which he was capable of performing at the time of accident.
(ii) Permanent Total Disablement- Total permanent disability (TPD) is a condition in which an individual is no longer able to work due to injuries. Total permanent disability, also called permanent total disability, applies to cases in which the individual may never be able to work again.
17. Taking the type of disability into concern, just compensation should to awarded to the person aggrieved. "Just Compensation"
should include all elements that would go to place the victim in as near a position as she or he was in, before the occurrence of the accident. Whilst no amount of money or other material compensation can erase the trauma, pain and suffering that a victim undergoes after a serious accident, (or replace the loss of a loved one), monetary compensation is the manner known to law, whereby society assures some measure of restitution to those who survive, and the victims who have to face their lives. ]
18. Under Section 4 of the 1923 Act, the amount of compensation an employer has to provide workers is as follows:
(i) Death of the worker: 50% of the worker's monthly wages multiplied with relevant factors; or Rs. 1,20,000, whichever is more.
(ii) Permanent Total Disability: 60% of the monthly wages, multiplied by relevant factor; or Rs. 1,40,000, whichever is more.
(iii) Permanent Partial Disability: In such cases, the amount payable is a percentage of the loss of earning capacity due to the injury. These injuries are mentioned in Part II of Schedule I of the Act.
(iv) Temporary Disability: 25% of the employee's monthly wages.
19. A three-Judge Bench of this Court in Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and Another, (2011) 1 SCC 343 categorically assessed the assessment of future loss of earnings due to permanent disability. The operative portion of the judgment reads as under: -
"9. The percentage of permanent disability is expressed by the Doctors with reference to the whole body, or more often than not, with reference to a particular limb. When a disability certificate states that the injured has suffered permanent disability to an extent of 45% of the left lower limb, it is not the same as 45% permanent disability with reference to the whole body. The extent of disability of a limb (or part of the body) expressed in terms of a percentage of the total functions of that limb, obviously cannot be assumed to be the extent of disability of the whole body. If there is Page 10 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined 60% permanent disability of the right hand and 80% permanent disability of left leg, it does not mean that the extent of permanent disability with reference to the whole body is 140% (that is 80% plus 60%). If different parts of the body have suffered different percentages of disabilities, the sum total thereof expressed in terms of the permanent disability with reference to the whole body, cannot obviously exceed 100%.
10. Where the claimant suffers a permanent disability as a result of injuries, the assessment of compensation under the head of loss of future earnings, would depend upon the effect and impact of such permanent disability on his earning capacity. The Tribunal should not mechanically apply the percentage of permanent disability as the percentage of economic loss or loss of earning capacity. In most of the cases, the percentage of economic loss, that is, percentage of loss of earning capacity, arising from a permanent disability will be different from the percentage of permanent disability. Some Tribunals wrongly assume that in all cases, a particular extent (percentage) of permanent disability would result in a corresponding loss of earning capacity, and consequently, if the evidence produced show 45% as the permanent disability, will hold that there is 45% loss of future earning capacity. In most of the cases, equating the extent (percentage) of loss of earning capacity to the extent (percentage) of permanent disability will result in award of either too low or too high a compensation.
11. What requires to be assessed by the Tribunal is the effect of the permanently disability on the earning capacity of the injured; and after assessing the loss of earning capacity in terms of a percentage of the income, it has to be quantified in terms of money, to arrive at the future loss of earnings (by applying the standard multiplier method used to determine loss of dependency). We may however note that in some cases, on appreciation of evidence and assessment, the Tribunal may find that percentage of loss of earning capacity as a result of the permanent disability, is approximately the same as the percentage of permanent disability in which case, of course, the Tribunal will adopt the said percentage for determination of compensation.
12. Therefore, the Tribunal has to first decide whether there is any permanent disability and if so the extent of such permanent disability. This means that the tribunal should consider and decide with reference to the evidence:
(i) whether the disablement is permanent or temporary;
(ii) if the disablement is permanent, whether it is permanent total disablement or permanent partial disablement, Page 11 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined
(iii) if the disablement percentage is expressed with reference to any specific limb, then the effect of such disablement of the limb on the functioning of the entire body, that is the permanent disability suffered by the person.
If the Tribunal concludes that there is no permanent disability then there is no question of proceeding further and determining the loss of future earning capacity. But if the Tribunal concludes that there is permanent disability then it will proceed to ascertain its extent. After the Tribunal ascertains the actual extent of permanent disability of the claimant based on the medical evidence, it has to determine whether such permanent disability has affected or will affect his earning capacity.
13. Ascertainment of the effect of the permanent disability on the actual earning capacity involves three steps. The Tribunal has to first ascertain what activities the claimant could carry on in spite of the permanent disability and what he could not do as a result of the permanent ability (this is also relevant for awarding compensation under the head of loss of amenities of life). The second step is to ascertain his avocation, profession and nature of work before the accident, as also his age. The third step is to find out whether (i) the claimant is totally disabled from earning any kind of livelihood, or
(ii) whether in spite of the permanent disability, the claimant could still effectively carry on the activities and functions, which he was earlier carrying on, or (iii) whether he was prevented or restricted from discharging his previous activities and functions, but could carry on some other or lesser scale of activities and functions so that he continues to earn or can continue to earn his livelihood.
14. For example, if the left hand of a claimant is amputated, the permanent physical or functional disablement may be assessed around 60%. If the claimant was a driver or a carpenter, the actual loss of earning capacity may virtually be hundred percent, if he is neither able to drive or do carpentry. On the other hand, if the claimant was a clerk in government service, the loss of his left hand may not result in loss of employment and he may still be continued as a clerk as he could perform his clerical functions; and in that event the loss of earning capacity will not be 100% as in the case of a driver or carpenter, nor 60% which is the actual physical disability, but far less. In fact, there may not be any need to award any compensation under the head of `loss of future earnings', if the claimant continues in government service, though he may be awarded compensation under the head of loss of amenities as a consequence of losing his hand. Sometimes the injured claimant may be continued in service, but may not found suitable for discharging the duties attached to the post or job which he was Page 12 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined earlier holding, on account of his disability, and may therefore be shifted to some other suitable but lesser post with lesser emoluments, in which case there should be a limited award under the head of loss of future earning capacity, taking note of the reduced earning capacity." (emphasis supplied)".
10. In the case of Chanappa Nagappa Muchalagoda Vs. Divisional Manager, new India Insurance Company Limited, (2020) 1 SCC 796, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held and observed in para - 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 as under:-
"8. Aggrieved, the Appellant has filed the present Civil Appeal before this Court for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the High Court.
9. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, and perused the pleadings on record.
10. It is the admitted position that the Appellant can no longer pursue his vocation as a driver of heavy vehicles. The medical evidence on record has corroborated his inability to stand for a long period of time, or even fold his legs. As a consequence, the Appellant has got permanently incapacitated to pursue his vocation as a driver.
11. This Court in Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar and Ors., 2011 1 SCC 343 held that:
"13. Ascertainment of the effect of the permanent disability on the actual earning capacity involves three steps. The Tribunal has to first ascertain what activities the claimant could carry on in spite of the permanent disability and what he could not do as a result of the permanent ability (this is also relevant for awarding compensation under the head of loss of amenities of life). The second step is to ascertain his avocation, profession and nature of work before the accident, as also his age. The third step is to find out whether (i) the claimant is totally disabled from earning any kind of livelihood, or
(ii) whether in spite of the permanent disability, the claimant could still effectively carry on the activities and functions, which he was earlier carrying on, or (iii) whether he was prevented or restricted from discharging his previous activities and functions, but could carry on some other or lesser scale of activities and functions so that he continues to earn or can continue to earn his livelihood.Page 13 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined
14. For example, if the left hand of a claimant is amputated, the permanent physical or functional disablement may be assessed around 60%. If the claimant was a driver or a carpenter, the actual loss of earning capacity may virtually be hundred percent, if he is neither able to drive or do carpentry. On the other hand, if the claimant was a clerk in government service, the loss of his left hand may not result in loss of employment and he may still be continued as a clerk as he could perform his clerical functions; and in that event the loss of earning capacity will not be 100% as in the case of a driver or carpenter, nor 60% which is the actual physical disability, but far less. In fact, there may not be any need to award any compensation under the head of 'loss of future earnings', if the claimant continues in government service, though he may be awarded compensation under the head of loss of amenities as a consequence of losing his hand. Sometimes the injured claimant may be continued in service, but may not found suitable for discharging the duties attached to the post or job which he was earlier holding, on account of his disability, and may therefore be shifted to some other suitable but lesser post with lesser emoluments, in which case there should be a limited award under the head of loss of future earning capacity, taking note of the reduced earning capacity.
15. It may be noted that when compensation is awarded by treating the loss of future earning capacity as 100% (or even anything more than 50%), 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. Be that as it may." (emphasis supplied).
12. In K. Janardhan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 2008 8 SCC
518. this Court examined the loss of earning capacity in the case of a tanker driver who had met with an accident, and lost one of his legs due to amputation. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation assessed the functional disability of the tanker driver as 100% and awarded compensation on that basis. The High Court however, referred to Schedule I to the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, and held that loss of a leg on amputation resulted in only 60% loss of earning capacity. This Court set aside the judgment of the High Court, and held that since the workman could no longer earn his living as a tanker driver due to loss of one leg, the functional disability had to be assessed as 100%.
Page 14 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4514/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/09/2025 undefined
8. It is profitable to refer to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sidram Vs. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd, (2023) 3 SCC 439 and Indra Bai Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.& Another, (2023) 8 SCC 217, more particularly paragraph Nos.25 to 30.
9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the aforesaid decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award is modified to the extent. So far as the liability to pay the interest is concerned, the same is not considered from the date of accident but it is from the date of filing of the application. The amount deposited by the Insurance Company shall be disbursed in favour of the claimant after following due procedure and after verifying the bank details through the RTGS / NEFT along with 9% interest from the date of application. The difference of interest for one year shall be refunded to the Insurance Company. Rest of the award is unaltered. Registry is directed to transmit back the record and proceedings to the concerned Court forthwith. Connected application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) V.R. PANCHAL Page 15 of 15 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Sep 18 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 02:04:08 IST 2025