Tie compensation to functional disability, says SC

The doctor certified her 90% disabled, but a bench held that she was suffering from 100% functional disability

NEW DELHI: Holding that functional disability faced by a road accident victim should be the deciding factor for granting compensation and not doctor-certified medical disability, SC has granted compensation of Rs 83.3 lakh to a minor who met with an accident when she was just six months old and is now suffering from severe spinal cord and neurological injuries.Though the doctor certified her 90% disabled, a bench held that she was suffering from 100% functional disability and quantified the compensation on that basis.”…In the given facts of a case, a lesser physical disability may result in a much higher functional disability and in an appropriate case, even amount to complete loss of earning capacity,” the bench said, adding it would be reasonable to assume that functional incapacity resulting out of a particular bodily injury may be higher and greater than what may be medically perceived.”The present case concerns a child who has suffered permanent disability at a tender age and whose future stands altered on account of the injuries sustained in the accident. In such circumstances, the court is required to adopt an approach which is realistic, humane and consistent with the settled principles governing award of compensation under the MV Act,” the bench said while increasing the amount of compensation to over Rs 83 lakh. “Cases involving child victims suffering permanent or near total disability constitute a distinct and special category within the law relating to motor accident compensation. A child, by reason of age, vulnerability and complete dependence upon others, stands on an altogether different footing from an adult claimant. The consequences of a catastrophic injury suffered during childhood are not confined merely to the immediate physical impairment caused by the accident.

Such injuries alter the entire course of the child’s existence and affect every subsequent stage of her life. The law, therefore, cannot evaluate claims involving injured children through the same lens that may ordinarily be applied in cases involving adults,” it said.