Supreme Court raises paralysed infant's accident compensation to Rs 83.38 lakh

A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and N.V. Anjaria enhanced compensation for a six-month-old paraplegic accident victim, applying a 100% functional disability standard and multiplier of 18.

The Supreme Court has enhanced the compensation payable to a child who suffered permanent paraplegia in a road accident when she was about six months old, raising the amount from Rs 45,40,800 to Rs 83,38,360. A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and N.V. Anjaria held that where a catastrophically injured child has no realistic prospect of earning a livelihood, the physical disability certified at 90% must be treated as a total functional disability of 100% for computing loss of future earnings.

The Court also restored the multiplier of 18 that the tribunal had applied and the High Court had reduced to 15. It directed the insurer, New India Assurance Company Limited, to deposit the enhanced sum with interest at 9% per annum. The judgment, delivered on 3 August 2026, reworked almost every head of compensation to reflect the lifelong dependence of the injured child.

How the claim travelled to the Supreme Court

The accident occurred on 16 June 2015. The injured child, Shreejita Pattnaik, was travelling with her parents in a Hyundai i10 towards Sundargarh when a tanker coming from the opposite direction swerved right and collided with the car. The father and the minor suffered grievous injuries. The child was treated at multiple hospitals and later at institutions including AIIMS Bhubaneswar and NIMHANS Bengaluru.

She was diagnosed with post-traumatic myelopathy with paraplegia, a locomotor disability assessed at 90% and certified as permanent. She would require lifelong medication, day-to-day assistance and remain dependent on others.

The claim, filed by her mother as natural guardian in M.A.C. Case No. 572 of 2015, was allowed by the 3rd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuttack on 16 April 2022, awarding Rs 30,12,960 with interest at 6% per annum. On appeal, the Orissa High Court on 11 January 2023 enhanced the total to Rs 45,40,800, but reduced the multiplier from 18 to 15 while raising several non-pecuniary heads.

Physical disability versus functional disability

The Court framed the core question as whether the High Court's enhanced award met the requirement of “just compensation” under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. There was no dispute over the accident, negligence, or the insurer's liability.

Drawing on Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar, the Court explained that medically certified physical disability and actual loss of earning capacity need not coincide. It relied on Shankar Dutt v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. to hold that functional disability may exceed physical impairment.

Given that the child was six months old at the time of the accident and could never engage in any avocation, the Court concluded her earning capacity stood extinguished. “Her functional disability is total,” the Court held, treating the disability as 100% for the loss-of-earnings calculation.

Multiplier and notional income recomputed

The Court held that the High Court erred in altering the multiplier from 18 to 15. Referring to Kajal v. Jagdish Chand, Abhimanyu Partap Singh v. Namita Sekhon, Baby Sakshi Greola v. Manzoor Ahmed Simon and Hansraj v. Mukesh Nath, it noted a recent trend of applying the multiplier of 18 for injured child victims and restored it.

On notional income, the Court found the tribunal had wrongly treated the child as an unskilled labourer and had applied a notification that took effect after the accident. Following Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari, it applied the minimum wage for a skilled worker. As on the date of the accident, the skilled wage in Orissa worked out to Rs 192.50 per day, giving an annual income of Rs 69,300. Adding 40% for future prospects and applying the multiplier of 18 with 100% functional disability, loss of future earnings came to Rs 17,46,360.

Attendant charges and non-pecuniary heads

Applying the multiplier system to attendant charges as directed in Kajal and reiterated in Baby Sakshi Greola, the Court took two attendants at Rs 6,000 each per month. The annual figure of Rs 1,44,000, multiplied by 18, yielded Rs 25,92,000 for attendant charges, against the High Court's Rs 1,30,000.

For pain, suffering, loss of amenities and loss of marriage prospects, the Court enhanced the combined award from Rs 22,00,000 to Rs 25,00,000. Future medical treatment was raised from Rs 5,00,000 to Rs 10,00,000, and conveyance and special diet from Rs 50,000 to Rs 2,00,000. Medical expenses of Rs 3,00,000 were left undisturbed.

Order

The Court re-determined the total compensation at Rs 83,38,360 and enhanced the award from Rs 45,40,800 accordingly. The appellant was held entitled to interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition until realisation.

New India Assurance Company Limited was directed to deposit the entire compensation with accrued interest within six weeks before the 3rd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuttack, which would disburse it after due procedure. The High Court's judgment was modified to that extent and the appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.