In cases of total permanent disability involving a minor, compensation must be calculated using minimum wage rates for skilled and semi-skilled labor, incorporating future prospects and the necessity for lifelong attendant care, ensuring the award is just, reasonable, and sufficient to cover future medical and personal requirements.

ATUL S. CHANDURKAR, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the claimant who is not satisfied with the partial enhancement in the amount of compensation as awarded by the learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court1 pursuant to the judgment dated

09.04.2024 in S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1334 of 2022.

Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by

NIDHI AHUJA Date: 2026.05.06 Reason:

1 In short, “the High Court”

3. According to the appellant, on 08.11.2016 he alongwith his friend were riding on a motorcycle on Mundoita Kalawar Road. The appellant was aged about fourteen years and was a pillion rider. The first respondent drove the motorcycle in a negligent manner due to which the motorcycle hit the rear portion of a tractor trolley. The appellant fell down and suffered grievous injuries on his neck, head, backbone and also suffered fractures. As a result of the said accident, the appellant was required to be hospitalized for about 203 days. He suffered 100% permanent disability on account of the said accident. He, therefore, preferred a claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 19882 seeking compensation of an amount of ₹22,45,000/- before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, For short, ‘the Claims Tribunal’. Since the said motorcycle was owned by the second respondent and was insured with the third respondent, the claim for compensation was made against all of them.

4. The driver of the motorcycle as well as its owner did not file their written statements and were accordingly proceeded against ex parte. On behalf of the third respondent - Insurance Company, written statement was filed denying the claim as made. Before the

2 For short, ‘the said Act’

Claims Tribunal, the appellant examined his father – Pawan Kumar and another witness, Kamlesh Kumar Sharma. On behalf of the Insurance Company, Hiralal Bambi came to be examined. The learned Judge of the Claims Tribunal after considering the entire material on record and after appreciating the evidence led by the parties was pleased to award compensation of an amount of ₹7,76,543/- in the following manner:-

5. The appellant not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal preferred an appeal under Section 173 of the said Act. The Insurance Company did not challenge the findings recorded by the Claims Tribunal as regards its liability to satisfy the claim for compensation. As a result, the said findings became final. The High Court, thus, considered the prayer for enhancement in the amount of compensation. While partly allowing the appeal, the High Court enhanced the amount of compensation in the following manner:-

The total enhancement thus granted by the High Court was ₹4,41,000/-. The appellant not being satisfied with the partial enhancement in the amount of compensation has preferred this appeal.

6. Mr. Aditya Singh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that considering the age of the appellant, which was fourteen years when the accident took place, the notional income considered by the High Court was on a lower side. Placing reliance on the decision in Kumari Laxmisree Vs. The Managing Director, KSRCTC Depot, Bengaluru, C.A. No.4493/2025 dated 05.03.2025, it was submitted that notional income ought to have been taken at ₹10,000/- per month. The fact that the appellant suffered 100% disability of a permanent nature, the attendant charges as awarded were on a lower side. Referring to the evidence on record, it was submitted that the appellant was in need of continuous assistance during the entire day. Considering h