Motor Accident Claim Tribunal granted a hefty compensation of Rs 6h0.56 lakh to a 28 year old woman injured in a road mishap in 2011. In what is a rare instance, the MACT has included in the payout Rs 2 lakh for “loss of future marriage prospects”.

The tribunal said that it was quite clear that she has missed out on marriage prospects due to the injuries in the accident. Hence, an amount of Rs 2 lakh is awarded towards such loss of marriage prospect.

The woman, who was a grade A student doing her first-year B.Com, was knocked down by a speeding car on November 1, 2011, in front of her grandfather and sister, resulting in brain and pelvic injuries that needed hospitalization for over a month. These injuries have now limited her physical and mental capacities.

An application was filed before the tribunal in December 2011 against the alleged car owner, Less Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd, and the insurer, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd.

The victim said while she was crossing the Sion-Trombay Road near Somaiya ground at around 8 am on November 1, 2011, the car came from Chembur towards Sion in a rash manner and hit her from behind, resulting into serious injuries in her head and other parts of the body. After being treated at Sion Hospital, she was shifted to a hospital in her hometown Meerut. There she was admitted on December 9, 2011, till January 9, 2012. Her treatment continued at a specialized neurology hospital until October 2012.

The woman told the tribunal that due to the injuries, she was under severe pain and unable to perform her daily work with the same stamina and power as prior to the accident. She also complained of not being able to attend college. The doctor, who deposed on the nature of the injuries, explained that it was a “generalized injury to the brain, affecting motor function, thought function, memory and speech functions, leading to hampering of normal day-to-day activities”. The doctor described it as “the most severe injury before death” and said the victim had to depend on her relatives for her daily activities.

The company denied that it owned the car. Claiming that it had only leased the vehicle, it said there was no liability against it. The insurance company denied the car’s involvement in the accident. However, the court said that the FIR revealed that the road was 60-ft-wide and despite the sufficient space, the driver had failed to take reasonable care and caution.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here