1 FA 142.20 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO.142 OF 2020 Anuja d/o Jagannath Rathod (Patil), Aged about 15 years, Occupation-Education, Minor, through natural guardian Father Jagannath s/o Ramkrushna Rathod (Patil), R/o. Dharel, Tq. Akot, District-Akola. .. Appellant ..Versus.. 1) Rameshwar Prakash Mundale, Aged about 25 years, Occupation-Driver, R/o. At Post. Nakhegaon, Tq. Akot, Presently R/o. Teacher Colony, Chohotta Bazar, Tq. Akot, District-Akola. 2) Sau. Aruna Prakashrao Mundale, Aged about 52 years, Occupation-Business, R/o. At Post Nakhegaon, Tq. Akot, Presently R/o. Teacher Colony, Chohotta Bazar, Tq. Akot, District-Akola. 3) Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Company Limited, Akola, District Central Co-Op. Bank, 3rd Floor, Old Cotton Market Akola, Tq. & Dist. Akola. .. Respondents 2026:BHC-NAG:10956 2 FA 142.20 Mr. S.D. Chopade, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Amol P. Gase, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2, Mr. B.P. Bhatt, Advocate for Respondent No.3. …………… CORAM : PRAVIN S. PATIL, J. DATED : 19.08.2026. JUDGMENT 1. In the present matter, the appellant, who is the original claimant, has filed the present appeal against the judgment and order dated 08.01.2019 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akola for enhancement of compensation. 2. The facts which are not disputed in the present appeal are as under : On 30.12.2010, the appellant/claimant, who was of eight years age, was returning back from the temple at Chohotta Bazar, at that time, the offending truck owned by the respondent no.2 gave dash to her. In the said accident, she came under the rear wheel and the said truck was passed over her right leg. As a result, her right leg was totally crushed and was required to be amputated above the knee. As a result, the 3 FA 142.20 appellant has sustained 85% permanent disability and she is facing the serious problems due to the accident. 3. In this background, the application for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act was filed before the Tribunal claiming thereby the compensation of Rs.17,25,000/-. The appellant has mainly relied upon the disability certificate which stated the disability to the extent of 85% and also on other grounds such as non consideration of future prospects, loss of amenities, towards pain and agony and future medical expenses etc. 4. The learned Tribunal, while deciding the claim petition, instead of considering the income by applying the principles of the Minimum Wages Act, which are required to be made applicable in the cases where the accident is caused to the minor, as per Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, only on the basis of conventional heads i.e. on account of pain and agony, medical expenses etc. has awarded the compensation of Rs.8,03,600/-. The appellant, therefore, approached before this court by way of present appeal for 4 FA 142.20 enhancement of compensation. 5. According to the appellant, the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Kajal .vs. Jagdish Chand and others, decided on 5th February 2020 in Civil Appeal No.735/2020, had held that in the cases of compensation to minors though the minor was not having any earning capacity at the time of accident, but considering her future earnings, expenses towards treatment, hospitalization, transportation, attendant charges, pain, suffering, loss of amenities, loss of marriage prospects and future medical treatment, the compensation required to be awarded. The relevant observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kajal .vs. Jagdish Chand and others (supra) would be relevant referred in the matter. Paras 5 and 6 of the said judgment reads as under : 5. The principles with regard to determination of just compensation contemplated under the Act are well settled. Injuries cause deprivation to the body which entitles the claimant to claim damages. The damages may vary according to the gravity of the injuries sustained by the claimant in an accident. On account of the injuries, the claimant may suffer consequential losses such as (i) loss of earning: 5 FA 142.20 (ii) expenses on treatment which may include medical expenses, transportation, special diet. attendant charges etc.. (iii) loss or diminution to the pleasures of life by loss of a particular part of the body, and (iv) loss of future earning capacity. Damages can be pecuniary as well as non-pecuniary, but all have to be assessed in Rupees and Paise. 6. It is impossible to equate human suffering and personal deprivation with money. However, this is what the Act enjoins upon the courts to do. The court has to make a judicious attempt to award damages, so as to compensate the claimant for the loss suffered by the victim. On the one hand, the compensation should not be assessed very conservatively, but on the other hand, compensation should also not be assessed in so liberal a fashion so as to make it a bounty to the claimant. The court while assessing the compensation should have regard to the degree of deprivation and the loss caused by such deprivation. Such compensation is what is termed as just compensation. The compensation or damages assessed for personal injuries should be substantial to compensate the injured for the deprivation suffered by the injured throughout his/her life. They should not be just token damages.” 6. The appellant has further relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel .vs. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari and another, decided on 08.08.2025 in Civil Appeal No.10278/2025. From 6 FA 142.20 the said judgment, it is pointed out that the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Kajal .vs. Jagdish (supra) was upheld. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered that even the minor, who caused injury in an accident, is entitled for compensation on the basis of monthly income, future prospects, loss of income/future earnings, medical expenses, pain and suffering, loss of amenities etc. Accordingly, it is the submission of the present appellant that in view of this settled legal position, the amount which is awarded by the learned Tribunal is not just and proper in the fact and circumstances of the case and, therefore, seeks enhancement in the compensation. 7. The learned counsel for the respondents has strongly opposed the present appeal. According to him, the amount which is claimed by the appellant by way of present appeal is exorbitant. According to him, the case laws which are pointed out by the appellant are not disputed, but the multiplier which is made applicable in the above said judgments needs to be considered by this court in view of the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Devendra Kumar 7 FA 142.20 Tripathi and others .vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited and another, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2800, whereby the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that considering the law laid down in the case of Reshma Kumari .vs. Madan Mohan, reported in 2013 SCC OnLine SC 284, in cases of a minor, the multiplier of 15 is applicable and not of 18. 8. In view of the rival submissions of both the parties and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, it is clear that the appellant is entitled for the enhancement of the compensation. Accordingly, considering the settled legal position of law, the appellant will be entitled for the enhancement of compensation as under : Monthly income Rs.4,600/- Yearly income Rs.55,200/- Future prospects 40% i.e. Rs.22,080/- Rs.55,200+22,080 = Rs.77,280/- Multiplier (15) Rs.77,280 x 15 = Rs.11,59,200/- Permanent disability 85% Rs.11,59,200/- (-) Rs.01,73,880/- ………………….. Rs.09,85,320/- Loss of income/future earning due to disability Rs.09,85,320/- 8 FA 142.20 Medical Expenses (Already awarded by the learned Tribunal) Future medical expenses Rs.50,000/- Special diet and transportation Rs.1,00,000/- Loss of marriage prospects Rs.3,00,000/- Loss of income during treatment Rs.50,000/- Pain and suffering Rs.5,00,000/- Loss of amenities Rs.2,00,000/- Cost of artificial limb Rs.5,00,000/- Total Rs.26,85,320/- Compensation awarded by learned Tribunal Rs.08,03,600/- Total Rs.18,81,720/- Along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing petition. 9. In view of above, the appeal deserves to be allowed by holding that the appellant is entitled for the total compensation of Rs.18,81,720/- along with 7% interest thereon. Accordingly, the following order is passed : O R D E R (i) The appeal is allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akola dated 08.01.2019 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.82/2012 is modified to the extent that the appellant is entitled for the total compensation of Rs.18,81,720/-. 9 FA 142.20 (iii) It is needless to mention that the amount which is already awarded and deposited by the respondent-company will be deducted from the said amount and accordingly the total amount for which the appellant is entitled would be Rs.18,81,720/- along with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of order of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akola till it’s full realization. (iv) The rest of the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akola is confirmed. (v) The respondent-company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation within a period of three months from the date of this order. After deposit of the amount, the appellant would be entitled to withdraw the same subject to satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial). No costs. (Pravin S. Patil, J.) Gulande Signed by: A.S. GULANDE Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 24/08/2026 10:47:57