Summary
A five-and-a-half-year-old boy suffered spinal cord and head injuries in a 1996 road accident leaving him with 100% permanent disability — both lower limbs paralysed, partial loss of use of the hands and complete bowel and bladder paralysis. The Tribunal awarded Rs 9 lakh and the Punjab and Haryana High Court enhanced it to Rs 23.2 lakh, allowing future loss of earnings for only ten years because he had since begun practising as an advocate, and attendant charges for only twenty years. The Supreme Court further enhanced the compensation to Rs 51.62 lakh. Following Kajal v. Jagdish Chand, the multiplier method applies to future loss of earnings and attendant charges alike, and for a child injured below fifteen the multiplier is 18; a 100% disabled advocate cannot be equated with an able-bodied one, so the loss is lifelong.
Issues
- Whether, for a child rendered 100% permanently disabled, future loss of earnings and attendant charges must be computed by the multiplier method for life rather than for a fixed number of years, and what multiplier applies to a victim under fifteen.
- Whether the fact that the injured claimant later qualified and practises as an advocate justifies restricting future loss of earnings to ten years.
Provisions considered
- Section 166, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988Just compensation for 100% permanent disability was reassessed under pecuniary heads (future loss of earnings, attendant charges, future medical expenses including physiotherapy and diapers, transportation and motorised wheelchair) and non-pecuniary heads (pain and suffering, loss of amenities and marital bliss, loss of expectancy of life, special diet), applying the multiplier of 18. (¶¶ 12, 13, 15, 16, 24)
Held
- The multiplier method, which accounts for age, inflation and the uncertainties of life, governs not only future loss of earnings but also attendant charges; the High Court was not justified in confining future loss to ten years and attendant charges to twenty years. As Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi do not specify the multiplier for a victim below fifteen, guidance is taken from Kajal and a multiplier of 18 applies. (¶¶ 14, 15)
- A proficient advocate must be physically able to move from court to court; a claimant whose lower limbs are paralysed and upper limbs partly paralysed cannot be equated with other practising advocates, so the loss of earning capacity is for the whole life. Taking the High Court's figure of Rs 5,000 per month with the multiplier of 18, future loss of earnings is Rs 10,80,000. (¶ 17)
- Given the nature of the injuries two attendants are needed within 24 hours; at Rs 5,000 each per month, attendant charges with multiplier 18 come to Rs 21,60,000. Physiotherapy at Rs 150 a day (Rs 54,000 a year) with multiplier 18 is Rs 9,72,000, plus Rs 2,00,000 for diapers, check-ups and medical expenses; transport and periodic replacement of a motorised wheelchair justify a lump sum of Rs 2,50,000. (¶¶ 18, 19, 20)
- Under non-pecuniary heads Rs 4,00,000 for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, marital bliss, enjoyment and expectancy of life, and Rs 1,00,000 for special diet, total Rs 5,00,000; the aggregate compensation is Rs 51,62,000, an enhancement of Rs 28,42,000 over the High Court's award, with interest at 6.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition. (¶¶ 21, 23, 24, 25)
Result
Appeal partly allowed; compensation enhanced from Rs 23,20,000 to Rs 51,62,000, the enhanced amount of Rs 28,42,000 carrying interest at 6.5% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till realisation.