'Consider accident victims' future income'

A Bench of Justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly said: “Going by these principles, as we must, this court is constrained to observe that in this case the approach of the High Court (Karnataka) in totally refusing to grant any compensation for loss of future earning is not a correct one.” The apex court also held that subordinate courts must be liberal and not niggardly in determining the quantum of compensation in as much as in a free country the laws must value life and limb on a generous scale.

The judges made this ruling while directing the National Insurance Company to pay Rs 2 lakh compensation with 8 per cent interest to Yadava Kumar, a 37-year-old painter from Bangalore.

Normally, damages are given for an injury suffered, whereas compensation is given for the atonement of injury caused and the intention behind the grant of compensation is to put back the injured party as far as possible in the same position, as if the injury has not taken place, by way of grant of pecuniary relief, the judgment released here on Wednesday said.    

Broad-based approach
While clarifying its stand on the concept of loss of future earnings, the apex court said that in the matter of computation of compensation, the approach will be slightly more broad-based than what is done in the matter of assessment of damages.

At the same time, it is true that there cannot be any rigid or mathematical precision in the matter of determination of compensation, the bench observed.