Compensation for a minor victim suffering total permanent disability must be reasonable, encompassing sufficient notional income, lifelong future medical expenses for hardware maintenance, and necessary attendant charges, ensuring the claimant can maintain a standard of living appropriate to their lifetime care requirements.

ORDER

Leave granted

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 17th April, 2023, passed in Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 10130/2018 (MV-I) by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, which, in turn was preferred against the order dated 26th September, 2018 in M.V.C No.982/2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru City, SCCH-4.

3. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 11th August, 2013, the claimant-appellant, then aged 12 years, after practising dance class for the Independence Day Program at her school, was returning home in an auto-rickshaw at Tuppadamaduvina Gate, Bindiganavile, Nelamangala. While crossing the road after alighting from an auto-rickshaw, the KSRTC Bus (hereinafter referred to as the “offending vehicle”) bearing registration number K.A.09.F.3563 collided with the claimant-appellant in a rash and negligent manner, dragging her for a certain distance. Consequently, the front wheel of the offending vehicle ran over both her legs and caused multiple injuries to the claimant-appellant. She initially received first aid at Nelamangala Hospital, was then transferred to the Beluru IT Hospital, and, subsequently, shifted to Hosmat Hospital, where she was treated for two months in the ICU. On account of multiple fractures and injuries suffered, both the legs of the claimant-appellant above the knee were amputated.

4. In connection with this incident, a criminal case was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

5. A claim petition was filed on behalf of the claimant-appellant under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1989, before the Tribunal, seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, submitting therein that the claimant-appellant was still receiving treatment and has already spent more than Rs.10 Lakhs on medical and conveyance. After the incident, due to the injuries suffered, she was completely bedridden and needed the assistance of a female servant.

6. The Tribunal, vide its order, held that the respondent, being the owner and insurer, is liable to pay an amount of Rs.18,50,000/- as compensation to the claimant-appellant, along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. The Tribunal assessed the disability suffered by her as 100%. An amount of Rs.6,00,000/- was awarded towards the loss of income due to permanent disability and further awarded varied compensation towards different heads.

7. Aggrieved, the claimant-appellant filed an appeal before the High Court seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

8. The High Court, vide the impugned order, partly allowed the appeal and enhanced the compensation amount by an amount of Rs.34,69,200/-, the total compensation arrived at was Rs.53,19,200/- along with interest @ 6% per annum. The Court assessed the notional income of the claimant-appellant as Rs.8,000/- per month as per the cost of living and wages at the time of the incident. In furtherance of the exposition of law in Master Ayush v. the Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr., (2022) 7 SCC 738 the Court awarded Rs.24,19,200