A child suffering 21% permanent disability is entitled to ₹3 lakh under specified non-medical heads.

On 23 May 2012, the appellant, then aged approximately 16 years, was travelling in a Maruti Van bearing registration No. GJ-15-DD-9973 when it collided with a truck bearing registration No. GJ-06-VV-8957, allegedly driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1.

The appellant sustained grievous injuries and permanent disability assessed at 21% of the whole body.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Vadodara, partly allowed MACP No. 85 of 2013 and awarded ₹1,72,300 with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until realization.

The Tribunal apportioned composite negligence between the truck and the Maruti Van in the ratio of 70:30.

The claimant challenged the award only on the issue of quantum, contending that compensation should have been assessed under the principles laid down in Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.

Whether the compensation payable to the minor claimant with 21% permanent disability was required to be reassessed in accordance with the principles laid down in Master Mallikarjun.

Whether the claimant was entitled to interest on the additional compensation for the period of 2,074 days’ delay in filing the appeal.

Whether the insurer of the truck could be directed to pay the entire awarded amount initially, with liberty to recover 30% from the owner of the Maruti Van in view of the finding of composite negligence.

The Court applied the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., (2014) 14 SCC 396, that in cases involving children suffering permanent disability in motor-vehicle accidents, compensation under all non-medical heads— including pain and suffering, mental and physical shock, hardship, inconvenience, discomfort, and loss of amenities—should ordinarily be fixed with reference to the percentage of whole-body disability: ₹3 lakh for disability above 10% and up to 30%, ₹4 lakh up to 60%, ₹5 lakh up to 90%, and ₹6 lakh above 90%; ₹1 lakh applies where disability is up to 10%, subject to exceptional circumstances.

The Court also applied the established principle governing composite negligence that the claimant may recover the entire compensation from one joint tortfeasor, leaving that tortfeasor to seek contribution or recovery from the other negligent party according to the apportioned liability.

Interest was payable at 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition, but not for the 2,074-day period attributable to the delay in filing the appeal.

Since the appellant was a minor at the time of the accident and his permanent disability was assessed at 21% of the whole body, the Court held that the Tribunal ought to have applied the Master Mallikarjun scale.

The applicable amount under the consolidated head of pain and suffering, mental and physical shock, hardship, inconvenience, discomfort, and loss of amenities was therefore ₹3,00,000.

The Court maintained the Tribunal’s awards of ₹11,220 for medical expenses and ₹10,000 for special diet and transportation, as those amounts were not challenged.

The total compensation was consequently recalculated at ₹3,21,220, resulting in additional compensation of ₹1,48,920 over the Tribunal’s award of ₹1,72,300.

However, because the appeal had been filed after a delay of 2,074 days, no interest was granted on the additional compensation for that period.

Consistent with the finding of 70:30 composite negligence, the truck insurer was directed to pay the entire amount initially, with liberty to recover 30% from the owner of the Maruti Van.

The appellant was held entitled to total compensation of ₹3,21,220, comprising ₹3,00,000 under the Master Mallikarjun head, ₹11,220 for medical expenses, and ₹10,000 for special diet and transportation.

The appellant was consequently granted additional compensation of ₹1,48,920.

The insurer of the truck was directed to deposit and pay the entire awarded amount with 9% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition until realization, excluding interest for the 2,074-day delay, within six weeks; it could thereafter recover 30% from the owner of the Maruti Van through execution proceedings.

The Tribunal was directed to disburse the amount after verification and deduction of any deficit court fee, and no order as to costs was made.