No other way to compensate motor accident victim except by payment of just compensation: Supreme Court awards ₹50L to 5-yr-old

The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that in cases of motor vehicle accidents, though mental and physical loss cannot be computed in terms of money, there is no other way to compensate the victim except by payment of just compensation [Master Ayush v. The Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another]..While granting compensation of ₹50 lakh to a five-year-old victim who lost the ability to move his legs after an accident in 2010, the Bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramanian held,"The determination of damages in personal injury cases is not easy. The mental and physical loss cannot be computed in terms of money but there is no other way to compensate the victim except by payment of just compensation.".The Court was hearing an appeal contending that the compensation amount given to the victim of the road accident was inadequate on account of the injuries suffered by him. The appellant was a paraplegic patient who suffered from complete sensory loss in the legs, urinary incontinence, bowel constipation and bed sores..The Karnataka High Court and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had granted compensation of ₹13,46,805 and ₹18,24,000 respectively. The Supreme Court, being dissatisfied with the compensation given by the High Court and Tribunal, set aside the judgment of the former and granted the following compensation to the appellant: 1. Skilled minimum wages as on the date of accident - ₹3700. The apex court said that the compensation is to be assessed on the basis of said minimum wages as there is an assumption that the appellant must have earned this much once he attained majority. 2. In addition to the above, the appellant would also be entitled to 40% for future prospects in the light of the judgment in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi & Ors. The above compensation would be ₹5,180 per month and in consideration of the age of the appellant, the multiplier for determination of compensation would be 18. The final compensation for would thus be ₹11,18,880. 3. As the appellant will need the help of an assistant device to walk, which needs to be replaced every 5 years, another ₹10,00,000 is to be paid for 2 devices.4. Further, the appellant has not only lost his childhood, but also marriage prospects. The Court awarded ₹3,00,000 for the same.5. Conveyance charges of ₹2,00,000 must also be paid to the appellant. 6. Medical expenses of ₹5,74,000.7. Pain, suffering and loss of amenities - ₹10,00,000.8. Further, due to his condition, there shall be one attendant for the appellant for the rest of his life. Therefore, ₹8,00,000 as attendant charges to be paid.Therefore, the total compensation awarded to the appellant was ₹49,93,000 (rounded off)..The Court further allowed interest of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till realisation. ₹10,00,000 is to be disbursed to the father of the appellant as his guardian, it was directed..In conclusion, the apex court observed, ”The rest of the amount would be invested in one or more Fixed Deposits Receipts so as to attract the maximum rate of interest. The interest amount shall be payable to the guardian of the appellant every month. It shall be open to the guardian, during the minority of the appellant, to seek orders for withdrawal of the amount on the basis of medical opinion, if any major medical expenses are required to be incurred.” .For the appellant, M/S Devasa & Co appeared. Advocate Shashank Manish represented the respondent insurance company..[Read Judgment]