Compensation for a deceased minor must reflect prevailing minimum wages with future prospects.

On 1 June 2012, Maheshbhai Vestabhai Meda, his wife Sumiben Maheshbhai Meda, and their minor son Akshaykumar Maheshbhai Meda were travelling on a motorcycle when a tanker allegedly driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1 collided with it.

The parents and the minor sustained injuries, and the minor subsequently died.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Dahod, partly allowed Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 310 of 2012 and awarded ₹2,95,686 with interest.

The claimants challenged the award in appeal, limited to the quantum of compensation.

Whether the deceased minor’s income for calculating loss of dependency should be assessed on the basis of the applicable minimum wages rather than at ₹15,000 per annum.

Whether future prospects should be added to the deceased minor’s income and the appropriate deduction and multiplier should be applied in computing loss of dependency.

Whether the compensation under loss of estate, funeral expenses, and parental consortium required enhancement in accordance with the applicable Supreme Court precedents.

Whether the appellants were entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation, subject to exclusion of the period of delay in filing the appeal.

The Court relied on Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari & Anr., 2025 (0) AIJEL-SC 75833, for the principle that the income of a deceased minor may be assessed on the basis of the minimum wages prevailing on the date of the accident.

It applied the principles concerning future prospects, loss of estate, and funeral expenses laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680.

It further relied on Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors., (2018) 18 SCC 130, recognising the entitlement of the parents of a deceased child to compensation for loss of parental consortium.

The Court also applied the appellate order excluding interest for the 568-day delay in filing the appeal.

Since the deceased was a minor, the Court held that the Tribunal’s assessment of annual income at ₹15,000 was inadequate.

Applying Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel, it adopted the Gujarat minimum wage for a skilled worker applicable in 2012, namely ₹4,980 per month. It added 40% towards future prospects, arriving at ₹6,972 per month, deducted 50% towards personal expenses, and applied a multiplier of 15, resulting in loss of dependency of ₹6,27,480.

Applying Pranay Sethi, it enhanced loss of estate and funeral expenses to ₹18,150 each.

As both parents survived the deceased, the Court awarded ₹48,400 to each parent for loss of consortium, totalling ₹96,800, under the principle recognised in Nanu Ram.

The undisputed medical expenses of ₹40,686 were retained.

The total compensation was consequently recalculated at ₹8,01,266, from which the Tribunal’s award of ₹2,95,686 was deducted.

The appellants were granted additional compensation of ₹5,05,580, carrying interest at the same rates awarded by the Tribunal—9% per annum until 31 March 2021 and 7% per annum thereafter—excluding interest for the 568-day delay in filing the appeal.

The Insurance Company was directed to deposit the additional amount with applicable interest within six weeks of receiving the judgment, after which the Tribunal was directed to disburse it to the claimants following verification and deduction of any deficit court fees.