A child with permanent disability up to 10% is ordinarily entitled to ₹1 lakh compensation.

On 10 May 2000, the claimant, then a minor, was struck by motorcycle No. GJ-1-BN-7168 while walking on the correct side of Sola Bridge, sustaining multiple injuries.

After attaining majority, she sought compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Tribunal awarded Rs. 55,600 with interest at 9% per annum and assessed her whole-body functional disability at 8%, a figure to which both parties had agreed.

The insurer appealed, alleging that the motorcycle’s driver had been replaced; the claimant filed a cross-objection seeking enhancement under Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 7139 of 2013.

Whether the insurer established that the motorcycle’s driver had been replaced, such that it could avoid liability to the claimant

Whether the Tribunal’s award of Rs. 55,600 for a minor claimant with 8% functional disability should be enhanced under Master Mallikarjun

Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides the basis for a claim for compensation arising from a motor-vehicle accident.

Under Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., compensation for a child’s permanent disability is assessed by reference to the whole-body disability: the Court specified compensation of Rs. 1 lakh for disability up to 10%, subject to exceptional circumstances, in addition to actual treatment and related expenses.

The judgment also applied the principle that an insurer’s allegation of a driver’s substitution must be established by evidence and, in any event, such a change does not defeat the rights of an innocent third-party claimant.

The Tribunal had fixed disability at 8% on the parties’ express agreement, and the High Court therefore treated the claimant as falling within the up-to-10% category in Master Mallikarjun.

Because the Tribunal’s Rs. 55,600 award was below the Rs. 1 lakh benchmark, the Court found an additional Rs. 44,400 payable.

On the insurer’s appeal, it found that no evidence had been led to prove the alleged driver substitution and held that the allegation, even if proved, would not affect the third-party claimant.

It directed the insurer to deposit the enhanced Rs. 44,400, with interest at 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition until realization, within eight weeks.

The Tribunal’s other directions remained unchanged, and the Tribunal was directed to disburse the awarded amount to the claimant after verification and in accordance with due procedure.