A child injured in a road accident cannot be placed in the same category as a non-earning individual, the Supreme Court has ruled, while substantially enhancing compensation for a minor who suffered 90% permanent disability.
The case arose from a 2012 accident, where an eight-year-old boy sustained grievous injuries, including brain haemorrhage and amputation of his left leg, after being hit by a rashly driven vehicle. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal initially awarded Rs. 3.9 lakh, later enhanced by the High Court to Rs. 8.65 lakh. Dissatisfied, the boy’s family approached the Supreme Court.
The Division Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra observed, “It is now a well-entrenched and consistently reiterated principle of law that a minor child who suffers death or permanent disability in a motor vehicle accident, cannot be placed in the same category as a non-earning individual for the purposes of assessing the amount of compensation because the child was not engaged in gainful employment at the time of the accident. In such a case, the computation of compensation under the head of loss of income ought to be made by adopting, at the very least, the minimum wages payable to a skilled workman as notified for the relevant period in the respective State where the cause of action arises.”
The Court fixed the minor’s notional monthly income at Rs. 6,836, added 40% towards future prospects, applied a multiplier of 18, and accounted for 90% permanent disability. It further awarded enhanced amounts under non-pecuniary heads, Rs. 5 lakh for pain and suffering, Rs.3 lakh for loss of marriage prospects, and Rs. 5 lakh for an artificial limb, bringing the total compensation to Rs. 35.9 lakh with 9% interest from the date of claim.
The Court also issued a general direction for all future cases, stating, “In cases where the claimant has failed to furnish appropriate details of income or adequate proof thereof, it shall be the responsibility and obligation of the contesting party, more particularly the insurance company, to furnish before the Tribunal the applicable minimum wage as duly issued by the concerned government.”
With these directions, the Apex Court allowed the appeal and ordered the enhanced compensation to be remitted directly into the appellant’s bank account before September 30, 2025.
Case Title: Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel Vs. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari & Anr.
Case No: Civil Appeal No. 10278 of 2025
Coram: Justice Sanjay Karol, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
Advocate for Appellant: AOR Udian Sharma, Advs. Sahil Saraswat, Manav Mitra, Vishesh Sapra, Harsha Sadhwani
Advocate for Respondent: AOR Awantika Manohar, Advs. Parul Dhurvey, Aman Kr Pandey
Picture Source :
