In a significant ruling on motor accident compensation, the Gujarat High Court enhanced the compensation of a minor girl who lost her leg in a road accident, observing that courts must avoid awarding “niggardly amounts” in cases involving serious disability.
Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar increased the compensation from ₹8.77 lakh to ₹21.19 lakh, calling for a more humane and realistic approach while dealing with child victims.
Read also:- Bombay HC Disposes Unmarried Woman’s Abortion Plea, Cites Supreme Court Ruling on MTP Rights
Background of the Case
The appeal arose from an award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Bhuj, in 2018. The minor girl had suffered grievous injuries in 2013 when a Hyundai car hit her from behind while she was walking on the extreme left side of the road with her family after offering prayers at a temple.
According to court records, the impact was severe. She was dragged for some distance and later underwent amputation of her right leg.
The Tribunal had earlier held the driver solely negligent and awarded ₹8.77 lakh as compensation. However, the claimant challenged the quantum, arguing that the amount was inadequate considering the permanent disability and lifelong impact of the injury.
Read also:- Calcutta High Court Refuses to Quash Forgery Case Linked to 1963 Land Deed, Orders Police Prob
Arguments Before the High Court
Counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal had failed to properly assess the income and disability of the victim. It was argued that:
- The Tribunal wrongly adopted a notional income of ₹24,000 per annum.
- It ignored minimum wages applicable at the time of accident.
- Only ₹80,000 was granted for pain and suffering.
- No adequate amount was awarded for loss of marriage prospects despite amputation.
On the other hand, the insurance company defended the award, submitting that the Tribunal had passed a “just and proper” order based on evidence.
Read also:- Bombay High Court Flags Flawed Tree-Felling Notices, Closes Pune Coconut Trees Case
Court’s Observations
The High Court made it clear that compensation in cases of child victims must not be symbolic.
Quoting Supreme Court rulings, the bench observed that compensation must reflect the “degree of deprivation” suffered by the injured person. “It should not be just token damages,” the Court noted, referring to earlier judgments emphasizing just compensation.
The Court stressed that severe injury permanently alters a person’s life. “From the world of the able-bodied, the victim is thrust into the world of the disabled,” the judgment observed, underlining the mental and emotional trauma accompanying physical loss.
The bench also corrected the Tribunal’s approach on income assessment. Relying on recent Supreme Court guidance, the Court held that even in the case of minors, minimum wages prevailing at the time must be considered.
For 2013, the applicable minimum wage was ₹5,750 per month. Adding 40% towards future prospects, the Court recalculated the monthly income at ₹8,050.
Functional Disability vs. Physical Disability
A crucial turning point in the judgment was the distinction between physical and functional disability.
Although the doctor assessed overall body disability at 36% in cross-examination, the High Court found this inadequate considering the amputation below the knee and the child’s inability to perform normal activities without support.
The Court observed that disability affecting earning capacity must be realistically evaluated. It assessed functional disability at 50% instead of 36%, leading to a higher calculation of future income loss.
Recalculation of Compensation
Applying a multiplier of 18 (a formula used to calculate future losses based on age), the Court recalculated the compensation under various heads:
- Future loss of income: ₹8,69,400
- Pain, shock and suffering: ₹5,00,000 (enhanced from ₹80,000)
- Loss of marriage prospects: ₹3,00,000
- Loss of amenities and enjoyment of life: ₹2,00,000
- Artificial limb and future medical expenses: ₹1,50,000
- Special diet, attendant and transportation: ₹1,00,000
The total compensation was fixed at ₹21,19,400.
The Court maintained the ₹1,22,000 already awarded for medical expenses.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Orders Probe Into ₹14 Lakh Sabarimala Staff Transfers During Mandala
The Final Decision
Allowing the appeal in part, the High Court modified the Tribunal’s award and directed the respondents to deposit the additional ₹12.42 lakh within four weeks.
The Court ordered that the amount be disbursed after deduction of deficit court fees and remitted the record back to the Tribunal for necessary compliance.
The judgment concluded with a clear message: compensation must be meaningful, especially where a child faces lifelong disability due to another’s negligence.
Case Title: Umiya Nitingar Goswami v. Pratapbhai Valabhdas Chthani & Anr.
Case No.: R/First Appeal No. 2797 of 2022
Decision Date: 05 February 2026
