Remand for Examination of Medical Witnesses Essential to Determine Functional Disability in Minor Incurring Grievous Injuries

On May 28, 2018, the minor appellant (aged 6-7 years) was struck by a car (Reg. No. GJ-20-N-5054) driven in a rash and negligent manner.

The appellant sustained severe head injuries, allegedly resulting in 100% functional disability and total dependency on parents.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Panchmahals at Godhra, in MACP No. 27/2021, awarded a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- with 9% interest via judgment dated October 3, 2025.

The appellants challenged this award on the ground of quantum, asserting that the Tribunal failed to account for total functional disability.

During the appeal, the insurance company contended that the doctor who issued the disability certificate was never examined, depriving them of cross-examination.

1. Whether the matter should be remanded to the Tribunal to allow the examination of the treating physician and determine the actual extent of functional disability for the purpose of enhancing compensation.

The court considered the principles of determining compensation for minor victims with permanent disabilities as established in Master Ayush v. Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr. (2022) 7 SCC 738 and Baby Sakshi Greola v. Manzoor Ahmad Simon and Anr. (2024) SCC OnLine SC 3692.

These precedents dictate that compensation should be awarded under specific heads (such as loss of future earnings and amenities) based on functional disability rather than just physical impairment.

The court found that the evidentiary record was insufficient to determine the true extent of the minor’s disability because the medical professional who issued the disability certificate was not examined in the lower court.

Both the appellant and the respondent reached a consensus that a fair adjudication of the quantum—specifically regarding the claim of 100% functional disability—requires the doctor’s testimony.

Consequently, applying the necessity of a fair trial and the right of the insurer to cross-examine medical witnesses, the court determined that the existing judgment could not stand without further evidence.

The matter is remanded back to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchmahals at Godhra, with directions to facilitate the examination of the treating/disability-certifying doctor, and the Tribunal is ordered to decide the matter within six months from the date of the order.