The Supreme Court substantially enhanced the compensation payable to a six-month-old child who suffered catastrophic spinal injuries in a motor vehicle accident, holding that while her medically assessed permanent physical disability was 90%, her functional disability was effectively 100% as she had permanently lost the ability to earn a livelihood.
The Bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N.V. Anjaria reiterated that the Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation and that the expression just compensation under Section 168 requires courts to adopt a realistic, humane and welfare-oriented approach, particularly in cases involving children who suffer lifelong disabilities. The Court observed that compensation in such cases cannot be confined to conventional heads but must account for the child’s permanently altered future, dignity, independence and lifelong dependence on others.
The case arose from a 2015 accident in which the claimant, then six months old, sustained severe spinal cord and neurological injuries resulting in post-traumatic myelopathy with paraplegia. Medical evidence established that she suffered permanent locomotor disability, would require lifelong medical treatment and constant assistance, and would remain dependent on others throughout her life.
While examining the computation of compensation, the Court held that in claims involving child victims, the assessment cannot be limited to the percentage of physical disability certified by a medical board. Distinguishing physical disability from functional disability, it held that although the child’s physical disability was certified at 90%, her inability to engage in any vocation in future rendered her 100% functionally disabled.
The Court also restored the multiplier of 18, holding that recent judicial trends favour applying the highest multiplier for young children suffering catastrophic permanent disabilities. Further, it clarified that the notional income of an injured child should be determined with reference to the minimum wages of a skilled worker, rather than those of an unskilled labourer, consistent with its earlier precedents.
Recognising the claimant’s lifelong need for assistance, the Court significantly enhanced compensation under several heads, including attendant charges, pain, suffering and loss of amenities, loss of marriage prospects, future medical treatment, and conveyance and special diet. It emphasised that compensation awarded in such cases is a one-time exercise and must adequately provide for the claimant’s future needs, as she cannot return to court later seeking enhancement for unforeseen expenses.
Recomputing the award, the Supreme Court enhanced the total compensation from ₹45.40 lakh awarded by the High Court to ₹83,38,360, together with 9% interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until realisation. The insurer, New India Assurance Company Ltd., was directed to deposit the enhanced amount before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuttack, within six weeks for disbursement to the claimant in accordance with law.
