A minor’s fatal-accident compensation must be assessed using applicable minimum wages, not nominal notional income.

Divya Pandey, aged about 13 years, died in a road accident on 21 October 2021.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded her parents compensation of ₹4,99,000, assessing her notional annual income at ₹36,000.

Her parents appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement on the basis of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari.

They argued that the deceased’s income should be assessed by reference to minimum wages.

1. Whether, in calculating compensation for the death of a minor child in a motor accident, income should be assessed by reference to minimum wages rather than the Tribunal’s notional-income figure.

2. Whether the Tribunal’s award should be enhanced and, if so, what compensation is payable to the appellants.

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal against an award of a Claims Tribunal.

Relying on Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari, the Court stated that a child who dies or suffers permanent disability in a motor accident should not be treated as a non-earning individual merely because the child was not gainfully employed; loss of income should be calculated using, at minimum, the notified minimum wages payable to a skilled worker in the relevant State at the relevant time.

The Court also applied the compensation principles in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram to calculate future prospects, deduction, multiplier and conventional heads.

The Tribunal had assessed the deceased’s annual income at ₹36,000. Applying Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel, the High Court instead treated her as a semi-skilled worker and fixed her monthly income at ₹9,930, being the relevant Chhattisgarh minimum wage.

It added 40% for future prospects, deducted one-half, and applied a multiplier of 15, producing compensation of ₹12,51,180 for loss of income; it retained ₹1,21,000 under conventional heads.

The resulting total was ₹13,72,180.

The appellants were awarded an additional ₹8,73,180, carrying interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim application until realization.

The remaining terms of the Tribunal’s award were left unchanged.