The Supreme Court has reiterated that compensation in motor accident cases involving child victims must address not only medical costs but also the long-term loss of mobility, ordinary pleasures of life, and psychological impact. Dismissing a Special Leave Petition filed by Rina Rani Mallick seeking further enhancement of compensation, the Bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice K. Vinod Chandran held that the amount of ₹27,03,328/- awarded by the Orissa High Court was adequate and even exceeded what was granted in earlier similar cases.
Background of the Case
The case concerned a motor accident in which a four-year-old child suffered a below-knee amputation of the right leg, resulting in a certified 55% locomotor disability. The accident occurred when the child was travelling with her parents in a bus that collided with a tractor. While composite negligence was established, the High Court directed respondent no. 2 to pay the entire compensation. The insurer did not challenge the liability.
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal initially awarded ₹20,03,328/- under various heads, including:
- ₹1,55,554/- for medical expenses,
- ₹50,000/- for future treatment,
- ₹5,00,000/- for pain, suffering, and loss of amenities,
- ₹2,00,000/- for loss of marriage prospects,
- ₹10,67,774/- for loss of future earnings (based on minimum wages).
High Court’s Enhancement
The Orissa High Court enhanced the compensation by ₹7 lakhs, citing inadequacy in amounts awarded under future treatment and non-pecuniary heads. This brought the total to ₹27,03,328/- with 6% simple interest per annum.
Supreme Court’s Analysis and Decision
The Supreme Court relied on its earlier ruling in Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., (2014) 14 SCC 396, where it was emphasised that:
“The main element of damage in the case of child victim is the pain, shock, frustration, deprivation of ordinary pleasures and enjoyment associated with healthy and mobile limbs… compensation should enable the child to develop in such a manner as to offset, at least, to some extent, the inconvenience or discomfort arising out of the disability.”
Further reference was made to Kumari Kiran v. Sajjan Singh, (2015) 1 SCC 539, where children with 30% and 20% disability were awarded ₹5.4 to ₹5.5 lakhs, including an additional ₹1 lakh over the Mallikarjun guidelines.
Considering the disability in the present case was 55%, the Court stated that a non-pecuniary award of ₹4 lakhs would normally be appropriate. However, since the Tribunal had already granted substantial compensation under various heads, and the High Court had enhanced the total by ₹7 lakhs, the Supreme Court held that no further increase was warranted.
“We are of the opinion that there is no scope for any further enhancement in this case. The amount granted is far higher than that granted in the two cited decisions,” the Court observed.
Accordingly, the Special Leave Petition was dismissed. The Court also disposed of any pending applications in the matter.
Citation: Rina Rani Mallick vs Susim Kanti Mohanty & Anr., SLP (C) No. 17267 of 2024
