Remand for fresh assessment of disability through Medical Board to determine just compensation for minor.

On February 20, 2012, the appellant, a 16-year-old minor, was walking on the outskirts of Village Netramali when he was struck from behind by an Indica car driven by respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner.

The appellant sustained grievous head injuries resulting in alleged total disability.

The Tribunal awarded ₹6,20,000 with 9% interest, based on a consented disability of 32% (reduced from 42.4% as the certifying doctor was not examined).

1. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was just and adequate, specifically regarding the assessment of disability and its impact on the appellant’s future earning capacity.

2. Whether the matter should be remanded for a fresh medical evaluation to determine the actual extent of permanent disability.

The court relied on the principles of "just compensation" under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The court specifically referenced the precedent set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Baby Sakshi Greola v. Manzoor Ahmad Simon and Anr. (2024 SCC OnLine SC 3692), which provides guidelines for awarding compensation to child victims for future treatment, loss of amenities, future prospects, and marriage prospects.

The court also applied procedural principles regarding the necessity of proving disability certificates through medical testimony or a formal Medical Board.

The High Court observed that while a disability certificate of 42.4% was issued by Dr. Balkisan N. Desai, the doctor was never examined. This led the parties to erroneously consent to a reduced figure of 32% before the Tribunal.

The Court reasoned that to determine "just compensation," the actual functional disability must be scientifically established. It held that the Tribunal failed to properly assess compensation under various heads such as loss of future prospects, marriage prospects, and future medical expenses as mandated by recent Supreme Court jurisprudence.

The Court determined that the interest of justice required a fresh evaluation by a neutral Medical Board rather than relying on unproven or consented estimates.

The Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal with a direction that the appellant appear before the Medical Board, Sabarkantha, for a fresh disability certificate and the Tribunal determine compensation under all relevant heads (future treatment, attendant charges, etc.) within six months.