Bengaluru, Sept. 6 -- An accident victim's return to work and continued employment cannot be treated as proof that her earning capacity remained unaffected, the Supreme Court said, while enhancing the compensation awarded to a woman who was rendered completely blind and suffered severe pelvic injuries in a 2011 road accident from Rs.2.94 crore to Rs.3.77 crore. In a judgment passed on September 3, a bench of justices SVN Bhatti and NV Anjaria held that assessment of functional disability in motor accident compensation cases must focus on a victim's ability to earn in the "open, competitive labour market", rather than merely on the fact that the person continues to retain a job in a "highly accommodated" workplace. Applying this principle, the court enhanced the compensation payable to a woman who was rendered completely blind and suffered severe pelvic injuries and a permanent colostomy in a road accident in 2011, raising the amount from Rs.2.94 crore awarded by the Punjab and Haryana high court to Rs.3.77 crore. The woman was 35 at the time of the accident while riding pillion on her husband Sushant Prabhakaran's bike, who died on the spot after being hit by a truck. She had been working as a Deputy Group Manager with IBM Daksh in Gurugram at the time. Although she returned to work after the accident and her annual cost to company subsequently rose from Rs.16 lakh to Rs.19 lakh as per the company records, she could perform her duties only with "specially created assistive software, flexible working hours" and other extensive accommodations provided by her employer. She had also remained on leave without pay for 19 months after the accident.The Supreme Court noted this and said that her return to work after her accident thus, cannot by itself be taken to mean that her earning capacity had remained unaffected. More importantly, the court took into account the effect of the injuries on her future career progression. A career-growth letter issued by her employer showed that she had lost out on opportunities to progress to higher positions, including General Manager, Director and Vice-President. The apex court also dealt with the claim arising from her husband's death. Das claimed that she was his legally wedded wife. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the high court, however, found that she had failed to establish the marriage through documentary or other sufficient evidence. The Supreme Court declined to interfere with those concurrent findings. However, while determining compensation for her injuries, the apex court took into consideration the loss of marriage prospects caused by the accident. It awarded Rs.20 lakh under this head, while making it clear that the amount was being granted on the peculiar facts of the case and "shall not be treated as a precedent". The Supreme Court treated her functional disability as 100%, rather than the 80% assessed by the high court, after taking into account the medical board's finding of a complete permanent physical impairment of the whole body....