The Supreme Court has underscored that the emotional and personal loss suffered by parents after the death of a child cannot be captured through rigid mathematical formulas, while affirming compensation awarded in a motor accident claim involving a young Chartered Accountancy student.
A Bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice N.V. Anjaria dismissed an appeal filed by Oriental Insurance Company against a compensation award granted to the parents of Akash Kumar, a 20-year-old CA (Final) student who lost his life in a road accident in Delhi in 2013.
The Court observed that compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act is intended to be “just compensation” and not the outcome of a purely numerical exercise. It noted that the pain endured by parents following the loss of a child cannot be evaluated with exact financial precision.
Akash Kumar was pursuing his Chartered Accountancy studies and undergoing articleship training when the vehicle he was travelling in collided with a truck parked on a Delhi road in the early hours of the morning. According to the claimants, the truck had been left on the roadway without reflectors, warning signs or parking lights, making it virtually invisible in the darkness.
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal found the truck driver negligent and awarded compensation of ₹81.21 lakh. That determination was later upheld by the Delhi High Court. The matter eventually reached the Supreme Court after both sides challenged the award—the insurer seeking a reduction and the parents seeking an enhancement.
While examining the insurer’s objections, the Court acknowledged that the Tribunal’s assessment of compensation involved some overlap in evaluating the deceased’s future earning potential and granting future prospects. However, the Bench concluded that revisiting the calculation at this stage would not further the cause of substantive justice.
The judges highlighted that the case concerned a young man standing at the threshold of a promising professional career. They stressed that the law’s effort to compensate such a loss is ultimately aimed at offering some measure of solace to those left behind after an irreversible tragedy.
At the same time, the Court declined the parents’ plea for a substantial increase in compensation based on assumptions about the deceased’s future success as a Chartered Accountant. It cautioned that courts cannot base awards on speculative projections regarding professional achievements that had not yet materialised.
However, the Bench found merit in the claimants’ argument that no amount had been granted towards filial consortium. Applying principles laid down in earlier Supreme Court rulings, the Court awarded ₹40,000 each to the deceased’s mother and father under that head.
As a result, the total compensation was enhanced from ₹81.21 lakh to ₹82.01 lakh, along with interest at the rate fixed by the Tribunal. The insurer was directed to deposit the additional amount within four weeks.
The ruling came in The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kalu Ram.
