How mother’s 22-year-long legal battle paved way for Rs 28 lakh compensation for her disabled daughter in Kerala High Court

Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen was hearing an appeal from an intellectually disabled girl who had lost her 100 per cent functional disability due to a car accident in 2004, seeking enhancement of compensation.

Though she is aged 25 years and legally an adult, her behaviour and traits resembled those of a small child, the court observed.

The order noted on March 16, that “though she is aged 25 years and legally an adult, her behaviour and traits resembled that of a small child.” 

100 per cent disabled 

• The first appellant/injured was a girl child aged three-and-a-half years at the time of the accident, and as a result of the injuries sustained, she suffered intellectual disability.
• After obtaining the necessary details through the government pleader, the family was contacted, and the injured was brought by her parents before this court. 
• The court interacted with her and observed that, though she is aged 25 years and legally an adult, her behaviour and traits resembled those of a small child.
• To evaluate the degree of disability, by order dated December 15, 2025, this court referred her to the medical board of the Medical College Hospital, Kalamassery, for assessment.
• Pursuant to this, the medical board examined the injured and issued a detailed report on January 24, 2026, assessing her with 75 per cent moderate intellectual disability and 20 per cent locomotor/functional disability. The total permanent disability was thus assessed at 80 per cent.
•  The court appropriately reassessed and fixed her functional disability at 100 per cent. 

Notional Income 

• The accident occurred in the year 2004, and no minimum wages had been fixed by the state of Kerala for a skilled labourer at the relevant time. 
• Therefore, to award just and reasonable compensation, the court appropriately fixed the notional monthly income of the injured at Rs 3,000, taking into consideration the year of the accident.
• Since the functional disability of the injured is fixed at 100 per cent, following National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi 2017, after adding 40 per cent prospects to the refixed income, the income would be Rs 4,200 (3000 + 1200).
• The tribunal already awarded a consolidated amount of Rs 4,00,000; there will be an additional amount of Rs 3,56,000/under the head of permanent disability.

Method of payment of compensation

• The girl sustained the disability when she was aged three-and-a-half years; she has now attained majority and is 25 years of age.
• She is intellectually disabled and needs support from her family throughout her life. 
• The court finds it appropriate to direct the tribunal to deposit 60 per cent of the enhanced amount now awarded in appeal, in a long-term fixed deposit.
• The deposit in a nationalised bank in the name of the appellants.
• The interest accruing on the said fixed deposit shall be payable to the claimants/appellants, if so required. 
• The second appellant, who is the mother/guardian and next friend, shall be allowed to withdraw the remaining 40 per cent of the enhanced compensation. 
• If any need arises in future for the withdrawal of the fixed deposit amount for the betterment of the first appellant/injured, the second appellant shall be at liberty to approach the tribunal by filing an appropriate application; and the tribunal, if satisfied that sufficient reasons are stated, shall permit such withdrawal of the amount.

Medical opinion

•  The psychiatrist of the medical board, after examining the injured, found that “she had regression in the developmental milestones resulting in features suggestive of intellectual disability.”
• After assessment by several tests, the clinical psychologist of the medical board reported that “the assessment reveals a mental age of 6 years and 11 months and SQ of 47, indicating moderate intellectual disability.”
• The neurologist found that “she has cerebellar dysarthria, mild imbalance in walking and abnormal position sense.” The neurosurgeon, after examination, opined that “she has subdural haemorrhage (L) occipital region with bifrontal subdural hygroma and mild brain contusion.”
• The medical board has assessed her permanent disability at 80 per cent.

Intellectual diability 

• Mental retardation, now referred to as intellectual disability, is a condition characterised by arrested or incomplete development of mental capacity, which affects intelligence, adaptive functioning, and practical skills. 
• It is assessed on the basis of measured intelligence quotient, functional abilities, and mental age, and is classified into different degrees depending on severity. Intellectual disability results in lifelong impairment and functional incapacity. 

 Day-to-day activity

• It is reported that she is able to carry out day-to-day activities without assistance, but with supervision. 
• The physiatrist of the medical board opined that “she can manage most of her activities of daily living with direct supervision, and her higher mental functions are affected with dysarthria and significant intellectual disability”.
• The intellectual functioning/mental age of the injured is that of a 6-year-old child. 
• She can carry out her day-to-day activities only under supervision. 

Appellant’s case

• Advocate Bharat Vijay, the counsel for the appellants, submitted that the first appellant/injured was a very active girl child who sustained severe injuries in the accident at the age of three-and-a-half years, which ultimately resulted in intellectual disability.
• It was submitted that the medical board of the Medical College Hospital, Alappuzha, assessed her permanent disability at 50 per cent as per disability certificate.
• The tribunal, placing reliance on a precedent, awarded only a meagre sum of Rs 4,00,000 as consolidated compensation for permanent disability.
• The counsel for the appellants contended that the injured is functionally 100 per cent disabled.
•  On account of the intellectual impairment, resulting in total dependence, loss of enjoyment and amenities of life, ongoing unexplained pain, hardship and suffering, and a lifelong need for support due to limited intellectual capacity.
• It was contended that she was admitted to a special school which accommodates students only up to the age of 25 years, and upon attaining that age, she had to be brought back to her parental home.
• The counsel also pointed out that she has lost her marriage prospects and would require the assistance of a support person throughout her lifetime owing to her limited intellectual capacity and inability to respond to the demands of day-to-day life.

Insurer’s Case

• The counsel for the insurer submitted that the tribunal has, in detail, considered the nature and extent of the disability sustained by the injured and has awarded just and adequate compensation. 
• It was submitted that, although the injured is intellectually disabled, she does not require the assistance of a bystander throughout her lifetime, as she is capable of carrying out her day-to-day activities independently.

Background

• On January 26, 2004, while the first claimant/injured was travelling in a car, a pickup van driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit the car, whereby she sustained serious injuries. 
• The girl and her mother approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of Rs 2.9 lakh in 2004.
• Respondents number 1 and 2, who were the driver and owner of the offending vehicle, did not appear before the tribunal.
• The third respondent insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy coverage for the offending vehicle, but disputing the liability and quantum of compensation claimed.
• The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, held that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle.