Chhattisgarh HC Raises Compensation To ₹15.55 Lakh For Child Injured At 2, Upholds 100% Earning-Capacity Loss Despite 60% Disability Certificate

Radhe Sori, aged about two years, was struck by a Hyva truck while standing on the platform outside his home.

He sustained serious injuries, including degloving injuries to his left hand and leg, and underwent treatment and surgery.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded him Rs. 9,55,035, holding the insurer liable.

The insurer appealed, disputing the connection between the alleged burn injuries and the accident and challenging the finding of 100% loss of earning capacity.

Radhe Sori also appealed, seeking enhanced compensation under non-pecuniary and future-expense heads.

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for appeals against awards of the Claims Tribunal.

In assessing compensation for serious permanent injuries, Kumaresh v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., (2011) 12 SCC 488, supports compensation under heads including pain and suffering, lifelong medical expenses, loss of amenities and enjoyment of life, loss of marital prospects, conveyance, and nourishment, having regard to the nature and consequences of the injury.

Narendra Singh v. Nishant Sharma, (2015) 14 SCC 353, applies those conventional heads in assessing the lasting effects of disability.

Sidram v. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2023) 3 SCC 439, emphasises that courts must account for the physical, mental, and emotional consequences of serious injury and avoid inadequate compensation.

The Court relied on the disability certificate and the testimony of the examining doctor, who described permanent deformity and stiffness in the claimant’s hand and leg, and stated that he would need assistance with daily activities and could not undertake strenuous work.

It considered the Tribunal’s assessment of 100% loss of earning capacity justified despite the certificate’s 60% disability rating, and rejected the insurer’s challenge to the connection between the injuries and the accident, noting that the medical bills related to the accident injuries.

On the claimant’s appeal, the Court found that the Tribunal had omitted compensation for significant lifelong consequences.

Applying the cited precedents, it added amounts for pain and suffering, future treatment, marriage prospects, and lifelong attendant assistance.

The claimant’s appeal was partly allowed, increasing the total compensation from Rs. 9,55,035 to Rs. 15,55,035—an enhancement of Rs. 6,00,000.

The enhanced amount carries interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim application until realisation; the remaining terms of the Tribunal’s award remain in force.

The Registry was directed to communicate the enhanced amount to the claimant in Hindi.