LexStreakRead free →
Supreme Court of India· 21 April 2026

Under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, on what assumed life span and what replacement interval is compensation for a prosthetic limb to be computed?

Prahlad Sahai v. Haryana Roadways & Anr.
2026 INSC 396 · CIVIL APPEAL NO.4642 OF 2026
Coram: K. V. Viswanathan; J.B. Pardiwala
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow s.168 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

On an assumed life span of seventy years for the claimant, with a block of five years recognised as the reasonable replacement period for a prosthetic limb. Applying that standard formula, a claimant who was thirty-two years of age at the date of the accident will need seven prosthetic limbs; a consolidated amount is granted per limb and a separate consolidated sum is awarded towards maintenance till the assumed life span of seventy years.

Headnote

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s.168 — Just compensation — Prosthetic limb — Restitutio in integrum — Assumed life span of seventy years — Block of five years — Government Notification rates — Functional disability — Future prospects — Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s.168 — Prosthetic limb — Restitutio in integrum — Government rates not binding — Held: Restitutio in integrum entitles an amputee to procure a prosthetic limb of his own choice from a private centre; where the provision claimed is reasonable it is no answer for the defendant to point to cheaper options. The rates in the Government Notification, being abysmally low, are rejected. (¶26, 27) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s.168 — Prosthetic limb — Assumed life span seventy years — Block of five years — Held further: Compensation for a prosthetic limb is computed on an assumed life span of seventy years with a block of five years as the reasonable replacement period, so a claimant aged thirty-two at the accident needs seven limbs, besides maintenance cost. (¶30, 31, 33) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s.168 — Prosthetic limb — Quotations from service providers — Held further: A claim for compensation under the head of prosthetic limb must be accompanied with requisite quotations from at least two or three service providers, enabling the Tribunal to make an informed assessment of the actual cost. (¶29) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s.168 — Monthly income — No documentary evidence — Functional disability — Held further: Documentary evidence of income cannot be expected from persons employed in that strata of income, and an amputated driver who can no longer drive heavy vehicles has a functional disability of hundred per cent. Appeal allowed. (¶35, 39)

In the Court's own words
Paragraph 29Nearer home, in the case of Chandra Mogera (supra), Sanjay Karol J. speaking for this Court said: -
Paragraph 30As would be clear from the discussion hereinabove, our Court has recognized a block of five years as the reasonable replacement period for a prosthetic limb, and we have followed the same.
Paragraph 31The appellant was thirty-two years in 2007. Applying an assumed life span of seventy years as the maximum for which as a standard formula compensation for prosthetic limb is awarded and calculating the life of one prosthetic limb as five years, the appellant will need seven prosthetic limbs. Insofar as the price is concerned, the appellant has claimed the 2007 price for the first block with interest @ 9 per cent. Though he has claimed for eight limbs the correct proportion to award would be seven limbs, since the amputation happened on 17.07.2009.
Paragraph 33We are also inclined to award cost of maintenance of prosthetic limb at Rs.15,000/- annually. For a block of five years, it would work out to approximately Rs. 75,000/-. We award a consolidated sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- till the assumed life span of seventy years. MONTHLY INCOME AND FUTURE PROSPECTS: -
Acts & Sections
s.168 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of Prahlad Sahai v. Haryana Roadways & Anr. — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is a Tribunal bound by the price range in the Government of India notification when awarding an amputee compensation under the head of prosthetic limb?Under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, what must a claim petition seeking compensation under the head of prosthetic limb or artificial limb be accompanied with?Under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, can a claimant''s stated monthly income be rejected merely for want of documentary evidence where he worked as a driver in that strata of income?Under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, what does the mandate to determine ''just compensation'' require where compensation is assessed for loss of a limb?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections