When future prospects higher than standard percentage, no bar on awarding higher compensation, SC

The Supreme Court has clarified that its recent Constitution Bench decision in National Insurance Co Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors, [2017 (13) SCALE 12] does not bar an enhanced claim for future prospects if evidence on record so warrants..The order to that effect was passed by a Bench of Justices AK Goel and UU Lalit in a case relating to compensation to be awarded to an orthopaedic surgeon..In National Insurance Ltd., the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court had held that determination of income while computing compensation has to include future prospects and that all persons whether, salaried employees or self-employed, should get the benefit of such future prospects..The Court had also set out the standard formula for calculation of such future prospects. It had then remitted the individual cases to be decided by regular Benches. .In the instant case, the question before the Bench was whether an orthopaedic surgeon was entitled to get a 100 percent increase in his income towards future prospects because of nature of his profession. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal had allowed the same but the Gujarat High Court had reduced it to 30 per cent by applying the standardised formula..The Supreme Court, however, concurred with the view taken by the MACT and held that.“…standardization may be the increase based on presumption but when there is an actual evidence led to the satisfaction of the Tribunal/Court that future prospects was higher than the standard percentage, there is no bar to the Court/Tribunal awarding higher compensation on that basis…. .In the present case, the tribunal has applied the correct principle of law and made the assessment of income by adding the component of future prospects higher than the standard percentage. The High Court held that the Tribunal could not have gone beyond the standard percentage. To that extent, the view taken by the High Court cannot be sustained.” .It, therefore, set aside the order of the High Court and restored the order of the Tribunal..Advocate Nakul Dewan appeared for the petitioner. Dewan was briefed by advocates Pradhuman Gohil and Taruna Singh of Gohil & Singh.