01Facts
The claimant was about 10 years old when, on 21 March 2013, the autorickshaw in which she was travelling to school was struck by a lorry.
p. 2She sustained fractures, including to her right femur, tibia and foot, and a doctor assessed 25% permanent physical disability to her right lower limb.
p. 6She brought a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Tribunal partly allowed the claim, awarding Rs.2,71,884 with interest at 6% per annum. The claimant appealed under Section 173(1), seeking enhancement.
p. 1 · p. 2 · p. 502Issues
i.Whether the claimant was entitled to enhancement of compensation, including compensation for future loss of earning capacity, treatment-period loss of income and future medical expenses.
p. 6 · p. 803Law Applied
The claim was brought under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the appeal under Section 173(1) of that Act.
p. 1 · p. 2In assessing compensation for a non-earning minor, the Court relied on Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3446, noting that the case addressed use of the minimum wages notified for a skilled worker and an applicable multiplier of 18.
p. 5Provisions in the judgment · 2 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173Section 166
04Reasoning
The Court held that the claimant’s status as a minor and student did not, by itself, justify denying compensation for future loss of income. Having regard to the multiple fractures to the same limb and her young age, it assessed loss of earning capacity at 9%.
p. 6As there was no material establishing the relevant skilled-worker minimum wage, it used a notional monthly income of Rs.8,000, added 40% for future prospects and applied multiplier 18, yielding Rs.2,17,728 for future loss of income. It enhanced compensation for pain and suffering and incidental expenses, reduced the award for loss of amenities, and added amounts for future medical expenses and three months’ loss of income during treatment and recuperation.
p. 7 · p. 805Holding
The appeal was allowed in part. The Court calculated total compensation at Rs.5,53,712, an increase of Rs.2,81,828 over the Tribunal’s award.
p. 8The operative order, however, directed the insurer to deposit additional compensation of Rs.2,81,882, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition, within six weeks; it directed release of the enhanced amount with interest to the claimant.
p. 8 · p. 9Original Court PDF
BABY FATHIMA SHIFAvsROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INS CO LTD
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
