In a significant blow to the insurer, the Punjab and Haryana High Court Thursday enhanced compensation to Rs 3.61 crore for a child rendered permanently disabled in a road accident, dismissing the insurance company’s plea to reduce the earlier award of Rs 78.1 lakh.

Ruling on cross appeals, Justice Archana Puri held that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had failed to award “just compensation” to Ashkara Jain, who was nine years old when the 2011 accident left her in a persistent vegetative state with 100 per cent permanent disability.

“The measure of compensation must reflect a genuine attempt of the law to restore the dignity of the being… Our yardsticks of compensation should not be so abysmal as to lead one to question whether our law values human life,” Justice Archana Puri said, quoting the Supreme Court.

The insurance company, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company, had sought a reduction of the compensation, while the claimant, through her father, sought an enhancement. Rejecting the insurer’s appeal and allowing the claimant’s plea, the court said compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act must be “fair, reasonable and equitable” and not “niggardly”.

The court underscored that the Tribunal erred in limiting future medical expenses and pain and suffering to just two years despite the child’s lifelong condition. “The child in the present case will remain bedridden for life… limiting the period of two years… is not appropriate,” it held.

‘Childhood dreams came dashing down’

Detailing the impact of the injuries, the court recorded that the child suffered severe brain trauma, underwent multiple surgeries, and remains unable to see, speak, or perform any bodily function independently, with food intake through a PEG tube. “Her childhood dreams came dashing down… her chances… in life were completely snuffed out,” the court observed.

Calling for a realistic and humane approach, the judge noted: “Compensation… cannot be equated to bonanza, but at the same time, it ought not to be a niggardly amount.” It added that courts must adopt a “broad-based approach” and ensure that victims are not forced to repeatedly seek enhancement for future needs.

Reworking the computation, the court recalculated loss of earnings by applying minimum wages and future prospects, significantly raising it to Rs 15.22 lakh. It also awarded Rs 1.22 crore each towards future medical care and attendant charges, recognising the need for lifelong specialised nursing.

On non-pecuniary damages, the court awarded Rs 30 lakh for pain and suffering, observing that the Tribunal’s earlier assessment was “palpably erroneous”. “She cannot communicate; she cannot enjoy the pleasures of life… she will miss out the fun of childhood, the excitement of youth,” the court said.

The total compensation was recalculated at Rs 3.61 crore, an amount enhanced by Rs 2.83 crore over the Tribunal’s award. The court directed payment of 6 per cent annual interest on the enhanced sum from the date of filing of the appeal.

Of the enhanced amount, Rs 1 crore is to be released to the father immediately for ongoing care, while the balance is to be secured in fixed deposits, with liberty to withdraw in case of medical need.

Dismissing the insurer’s appeal, the court reiterated that compensation is not a dole but a legal entitlement. “Awards of compensation are not law’s doles… they constitute entitlements under law,” it said.