Quantum of Compensation for Minor’s Death Reassessed Based on Skilled Worker’s Minimum Wages and Consortium.

On March 8, 2013, the deceased (Jigneshbhai Balubhai Vasava), a 14-year-old student, was a pillion rider on a motorcycle that was struck from behind by a truck (Registration No. GJ-05-AV-4141) driven rashly and negligently.

The deceased succumbed to his injuries.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Bharuch, partly allowed the claim petition (M.A.C.P. No. 468 of 2016) on July 3, 2023, awarding Rs. 2,59,800/- with 9% interest.

The appellant (mother of the deceased) challenged this award, seeking enhancement of compensation on the grounds that the Tribunal assessed the deceased's monthly income too low (at Rs. 1,500/-) and failed to grant adequate sums for consortium, funeral expenses, and loss of estate.

1. Whether the income assessed by the Tribunal for the deceased minor was just and proper in light of prevailing minimum wages.

2. Whether the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation under the heads of loss of dependency, loss of consortium, funeral expenses, and loss of estate as per settled legal precedents.

The Court applied the principles for calculating "just compensation" under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680 to determine future prospects (40% for age under 40) and fixed conventional heads (Funeral Expenses and Loss of Estate at Rs. 15,000/- plus 10% appreciation).

Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram (2018) 18 SCC 130 to award spousal/filial consortium (calculated at Rs. 40,000/- plus 10% appreciation).

For income estimation of a non-earning student, the court utilized the minimum wage notifications for skilled workers as prescribed by the Government of Gujarat.

The Court found the Tribunal’s assessment of Rs. 1,500/- monthly income to be erroneous. Since the accident occurred in 2013, the Court determined that the minimum wage for a skilled worker (Rs. 5,180/- per month) served as a proper benchmark.

Adhering to Pranay Sethi, the Court added 40% for future prospects (totaling Rs. 7,252/-) and, given the deceased was a minor, deducted 50% for personal expenses (leaving Rs. 3,626/-). Applying a multiplier of 15, the loss of dependency was recalculated to Rs. 6,52,680/-.

The Court noted that the Tribunal awarded "meagre" sums for conventional heads; thus, it increased Funeral Expenses and Loss of Estate to Rs. 18,150/- each and awarded Rs. 48,400/- for loss of consortium to the mother, which the Tribunal had entirely omitted.

The respondent No. 3 (Insurance Company) was directed to deposit the additional amount of Rs. 4,77,580/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of the claim petition until realization within six weeks. The Court maintained the exoneration of respondent No. 6.