A child’s future disability loss is calculated using income, multiplier, and whole-body disability.

The minor claimant, aged six at the time, sustained injuries in a road accident on 1 January 2022 involving a JCB.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal partly allowed his claim and awarded ₹5,76,044, with interest at 6% per annum.

He appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, seeking enhancement; the appeal was taken up for disposal with the parties’ consent.

The claimant relied on Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari to seek compensation for future income loss by applying income, multiplier and disability.

Whether compensation for the minor claimant’s permanent disability should include loss of future income calculated by applying income, multiplier and disability.

Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal required enhancement in light of the claimant’s injuries, disability and related expenses.

The appeal was brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Court referred to Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. as the basis on which the Tribunal had assessed compensation, and to Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari for the claimant’s contention that future income loss should be calculated using income, multiplier and disability.

For the calculation, the Court applied a monthly income of ₹15,500, a multiplier of 15 for a six-year-old claimant, and one-third of the assessed limb disability as whole-body disability.

The Court accepted the claimant’s future-income approach, noting that the 2022 minimum wage and notional income were both ₹15,500 per month.

It treated the doctor’s assessment of 40% disability to the right lower limb and 17% to the right upper limb as 57% combined limb disability, and assessed whole-body disability at 19%. Applying the multiplier of 15, it calculated future income loss at ₹5,30,100.

Considering the two fractures and other injuries, the claimant’s age, the 17-day hospitalisation and the need for a parent’s care for two months, the Court also assessed compensation for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, parental loss of income during the laid-up period, attendant and related expenses, and medical expenses.

It directed the insurer to deposit the enhanced amount with interest before the Tribunal within six weeks and ordered that the entire enhanced sum be kept in fixed deposit in the minor claimant’s name until he attains majority.