Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Case Number | C.A. No.-006544-006544 – 2024 |
| Diary Number | 257/2022 |
| Judge Name | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA |
| Bench |
|
| Concurring Judges | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR |
| Precedent Value | Binding |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms and clarifies existing precedents |
| Type of Law | Motor Vehicles Act, 1988; Section 166 |
| Questions of Law | Should compensation for permanently disabled minors under Section 166 MVA include multiplier-based future earnings plus specific heads such as attendant charges, loss of marriage prospects, special diet and transport, pain and suffering and future medical expenses? |
| Ratio Decidendi | The Court held that in Section 166 claims for permanently disabled minors the multiplier method per Pranay Sethi applies, using the minor’s monthly income with 40% future prospects and the appropriate multiplier. It recognised 77.1% disability based on medical certification. In addition to future earnings, heads such as attendant charges, loss of marriage prospects, special diet and transportation, pain and suffering, loss of amenities and future medical expenses must be included. The Court recalculated the compensation applying multiplier 15 to the adjusted income and disability percentage, fixed specific amounts for each head per precedents (Kajal, Sidram, K.S. Muralidhar), and modified the High Court’s award to a total of ₹15,13,337, awarding additional ₹7,64,454 at 8% interest. |
| Judgments Relied Upon |
|
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Applied multiplier method per Pranay Sethi for minors (multiplier 15); accepted medical board’s 77.1% disability certificate; added 40% future prospects; included heads for attendant charges, loss of marriage prospects, special diet and transport, pain and suffering, future medical expenses based on relevant precedents. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | A 14-year-old student suffered injuries in a lorry-auto rickshaw collision on 19.04.2002 due to rash driving by the lorry driver; Tribunal awarded ₹1,73,000; Kerala HC enhanced by additional ₹5,75,883; appeal sought further enhancement. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and Motor Accident Claims Tribunals |
| Persuasive For | High Courts |
| Overrules | Impugned Kerala High Court judgment in MACA No. 89 of 2009 |
| Follows |
|
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Affirms that minors’ future earnings should include 40% future prospects under Pranay Sethi.
- Recognises attendant charges (₹40,000) as a distinct head of compensation.
- Clarifies loss of marriage prospects (₹3,00,000) for permanently disabled minors per Kajal.
- Adds special diet and transportation (₹40,000) based on Sidram.
- Awards pain and suffering (₹3,00,000) following K.S. Muralidhar.
- Confirms future medical expenses (₹50,000) beyond actual bills.
- Demonstrates Court’s approach to aggregate specific heads for holistic compensation.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- Noted High Court’s enhancement but identified scope for further enhancement per Sona (minor) (2025) precedent.
- Applied multiplier method under Section 166 MVA: monthly income ₹3,620 + 40% prospects = ₹60,816; ×15 (multiplier) = ₹9,12,240; ×77.1% (disability) = ₹7,03,337.04.
- Held actual medical bills insufficient; fixed ₹50,000 to cover miscellaneous and future expenses.
- Awarded attendant charges ₹40,000 for caregiving costs.
- Fixed loss of marriage prospects at ₹3,00,000 per Kajal.
- Granted special diet and transport ₹40,000 per Sidram.
- Granted pain and suffering ₹3,00,000 per K.S. Muralidhar.
- Confirmed loss of amenities ₹80,000 as per High Court.
- Aggregated total compensation ₹15,13,337.04, rounded to ₹15,13,337; directed insurer to pay additional ₹7,64,454 at 8% interest.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner (Injured Minor):
- High Court’s award did not fully account for miscellaneous medical expenses and future treatment.
- Additional heads such as attendant charges, loss of marriage prospects, special diet, pain and suffering and future medical costs warranted.
Factual Background
A 14-year-old student in 7th standard sustained injuries in an auto-rickshaw-lorry collision on 19.04.2002 due to the lorry driver’s rash driving. He was later certified with 77.1% permanent disability. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded ₹1,73,000; the Kerala High Court enhanced this by ₹5,75,883; the minor appealed for further enhancement.
Statutory Analysis
Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 empowers tribunals to award compensation for injuries caused by motor vehicle accidents. The Court interpreted the application of the multiplier method (per Pranay Sethi), the inclusion of future prospects, and specific heads of damages without altering statutory provisions.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed