‘Needs lifelong care’: A decade on, Supreme Court raises teen accident victim’s payout 7-fold to Rs 57 lakh

“The amount of compensation as awarded by the High Court deserves enhancement. The appellant was aged fourteen years when the accident took place and as a result of the same has suffered 100% permanent disability…he would require the assistance of two attendants round the clock,” the Supreme Court said on May 6.

Crash left teen permanently disabled

The accident occurred on November 8, 2016, when Hansraj was travelling as a pillion rider on a motorcycle on Mundoita Kalawar Road in Rajasthan. The motorcycle allegedly rammed into the rear side of a tractor trolley after being driven negligently.

The then 14-year-old suffered severe injuries to his neck, head and backbone and sustained multiple fractures. The Supreme Court noted that he remained hospitalised for nearly 203 days and eventually suffered 100 per cent permanent disability as a result of the accident.

Hansraj subsequently approached the MACT under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation of Rs 22.45 lakh from the motorcycle driver, owner and insurer.

Compensation rose in three stages

• The MACT initially awarded a compensation of Rs 7.76 lakh under various heads, including loss of income, medical expenses, transportation, attendant charges and mental agony.
• On appeal, the Rajasthan High Court enhanced the amount to Rs 12.17 lakh after granting additional compensation towards future prospects, loss of marriage prospects and future medical treatment.
• However, the Supreme Court found the compensation still inadequate, considering the lifelong impact of the injuries and the claimant’s complete disability.
• It enhanced the amount by Rs 44.66 lakh over the high court award and by Rs 49.07 lakh over the original tribunal award.

Supreme Court recalculated income, future needs

• Appearing for the claimant, advocate Aditya Singh argued that the notional income fixed by the high court was too low and that the courts had failed to adequately compensate the victim for lifelong attendant care, pain and suffering, future medical expenses and loss of amenities.
• The insurance company opposed further enhancement, contending that the compensation awarded by the high court was reasonable and based on minimum wage calculations.
• After examining the record, the Supreme Court held that the high court had underestimated the claimant’s notional income by fixing it at Rs 30,000 annually.
• Holding that the earlier compensation awarded to him was grossly inadequate, the Supreme Court said the victim would require lifelong assistance and round-the-clock care after suffering 100 per cent permanent disability.
• Referring to the minimum wages payable to a skilled worker in Rajasthan in 2016, the bench recalculated the monthly income at Rs 5,800 and applied 40 per cent future prospects along with a multiplier of 18 based on the claimant’s age.
• The Supreme Court consequently recalculated the loss of income at Rs 17.53 lakh.

Rs 21.6 lakh awarded for two lifelong attendants

• The Supreme Court increased the amount awarded towards attendant charges after observing that the claimant would require two attendants throughout his life due to his permanent disability.
• The Supreme Court awarded Rs 21.60 lakh under this head alone.
• Apart from this, the court awarded Rs 10 lakh towards mental pain, suffering and loss of amenities, Rs 3 lakh towards future medical expenses, Rs 3 lakh towards loss of marriage prospects and Rs 1 lakh towards special diet and transportation.
• The total compensation was ultimately fixed at Rs 56,83,663 with interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till actual payment.

Fixed deposit directions for future care

Recognising the claimant’s future care requirements, the Supreme Court directed that 75 per cent of the amount awarded towards attendant charges be invested in a fixed deposit so the corpus continues to earn interest for future expenses.

“Since the appellant would require the services of two attendants for the rest of his life, part of the amount admissible under this head would be required to be invested in fixed deposit to enable the invested amount to carry interest so that this amount could be utilized in future. Such investment would also take into account any higher amount required to be paid to the attendants,” it stated.

The court ordered that Rs 1.5 lakh be released annually from the deposited amount while 25 per cent of the attendant charges and compensation would be released immediately to the claimant.

Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court modified the Rajasthan High Court judgment and directed that any amount already paid to the claimant be adjusted against the enhanced compensation.