A minor claimant is entitled to a 40% future-prospects addition when assessing future income loss.

On 23 February 2005, the appellant, a 16-year-old student, was riding his bicycle on the correct side of the road when respondent No. 1 allegedly drove truck No. WB-23-A-4670 rashly and negligently from the wrong side and collided with the bicycle, causing serious injuries.

The appellant was treated at L.G. Hospital and thereafter at Sterling Hospital, where he remained hospitalised from 23 February 2005 to 8 March 2005 and underwent surgery.

He filed M.A.C.P. No. 734 of 2009 claiming Rs.4,50,000 in compensation.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal partly allowed the claim and awarded Rs.2,19,291 with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing until realization.

The appellant challenged the award before the Gujarat High Court solely on the ground of inadequate quantum of compensation.

Whether the appellant, being a 16-year-old minor student with 8% functional disability, was entitled to an addition towards future prospects while computing future loss of income?

Whether the compensation awarded under the heads of pain, shock and suffering, and special diet, attendant and transportation charges was inadequate and required enhancement?

What enhanced compensation and interest, if any, should be awarded to the appellant?

The Court applied the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 (16) SCC 680, and Sidram v. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2022) INSC 1202, holding that a claimant is entitled to an addition of 40% towards future prospects in the applicable circumstances, including where the claimant was a minor at the time of the accident.

Future loss of income is assessed by applying the appropriate percentage of functional disability to the income enhanced for future prospects and multiplying it by the applicable age-based multiplier and twelve months.

Compensation under non-pecuniary and incidental heads must be just and reasonable, having regard to the nature of injuries, hospitalisation, surgery and duration of treatment.

The Tribunal had assessed the appellant’s notional monthly income at Rs.2,500, and that assessment was not challenged. Since the appellant was 16 years old and had sustained 8% functional disability, the High Court added 40% towards future prospects, resulting in a monthly income of Rs.3,500.

Applying 8% functional disability, the multiplier of 18 applicable to his age, and twelve months, the Court calculated future loss of income at Rs.60,480.

The Court maintained the Tribunal’s awards of Rs.1,18,591 towards medical expenses and Rs.7,500 towards actual loss of income.

In view of the appellant’s serious injuries, surgical intervention and hospitalisation for approximately fourteen days, pain, shock and suffering was enhanced from Rs.25,000 to Rs.50,000.

Considering the nature of the injuries and treatment, special diet, attendant and transportation charges were enhanced from Rs.25,000 to Rs.30,000.

The resulting total compensation was Rs.2,66,571, giving rise to an enhancement of Rs.47,280 over the Tribunal’s award.

The appellant was held entitled to total compensation of Rs.2,66,571, including an enhanced amount of Rs.47,280.

Interest at 9% per annum was maintained, with the additional compensation carrying interest from the date of filing of the claim petition until realization.

Respondent No. 3–Insurance Company was directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest within six weeks of receiving the order, after which the Tribunal was directed to disburse the awarded amount to the appellant, subject to due verification and deduction of any deficit court fee.

No order as to costs was made.