JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal has been directed against the Award dated 27-5-89 passed by the Motor Accident Claims, Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereby in a motor accident case resulting in sorious injuries sustained by the appellant - claimant compensation amounting to Rs 1,17,500/- along with interest thereon @ 12% per annum Irom the date of filing the claim petition, has been awarded jointly and severally against respondents Raghuvir Singh (driver). Indian Oil Corporation (owner) and the New India Insurance Company (Insurer). 2. In short, the relevant facts are that on 4-3-87 at about 1.30 P.M. appellant Basant Kumar, a young lad aged about 10 years, was going along with his parents near Chomu Bus stand and when he reached near the gate of Nagarpalika, Chomu, suddenly a Tanker bearing registration No. RRB 8347 being driven by its driver Raghuvir Singh (respondent No. 1) rashly, negligently and with a high speed, came from opposite side and hit him, thereby he sustained a rub abrasion 11 cm x 1.45 cm on posterior medial of left forearm and lacerated crush injury involving muscles, bone joints and tendons on all of his fingers and thumb of left hand and multiple injuries on the medial aspect of right thigh lower ⅓rd knee joint and right left upper ⅓rd. He was admitted to SMS Hospital, Jaipur on the same day, where compound fracture of his right humerus, compound fracture of the distal end, phalange of thumb, middle phalange of left index fingers, middle phalange and distal of left middle fingers were detected. To save his life, his index and middle fingers of the left hand were amputed. He was discharged from SMS Hospital on 13-3-87. Later on he was taken to the Medical Research Centre of Bombay Hospital Trust, Bombay where he remained as an indoor patient from 18-3-87 to 21-4-87 and again from 10-6-87 to 13-7-87 for the treatment of fracture of distal end of shaft of right humerus and proximal end of the shaft of ulna and dislocation of elbow joint. 3. The appellant through his natural guardian Mahavir Prasad filed a petition before the Tribunal claiming Rs. 2.85 lacs as compensation. The driver and owner of the offending vehicle did not file any reply. 3. The appellant through his natural guardian Mahavir Prasad filed a petition before the Tribunal claiming Rs. 2.85 lacs as compensation. The driver and owner of the offending vehicle did not file any reply. However, the insurance company (respondent No. 3), in its reply admitted the factum of accident but averred that the accident had taken place due to the careless and negligence of the claimant himself and asserted that the amount of compensation claimed was inflated and exaggerated. 4. The Tribunal framed necessary issues and after trial on appreciation of the evidence recorded, arrived at the conclusion that the accident was a result of an actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the Tanker and allowed special damages of Rs. 40,000/-for expenses incurred on the treatment and nutrition diet, Rs. 15,000/- under the head physical and mental shock and Rs. 7,000/-(sic) for permanent disability, inconvenience and loss of amenities and enjoyment of life, i.e. in all 1.25 lacs with interest thereon @ 10% per annum if paid within 2 months otherwise @ 12% per annum. 5. The appellant, being dissatisfied and aggrieved by the Award, has preferred this appeal for enhancement of the compensation amount. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (driver and owner of the offending vehicle) despite sufficient service have preferred to remain present (absent). 6. I have heard Shri Sandeep Mathur for the appellant claimant and Shri S. C. Srivastava for the insurer at length and carefully perused the record of the Tribunal. 7. Shri Sandeep Mathur, learned counsel for the appellant has strenuously urged that having regard to the tender age of the injured appellant, severity of the injuries sustained by him, consequential degree of permanent disablement and incapacitation of his right hand and loss of amenities of life, the compensation amount allowed by the learned Tribunal is niggardly on the lower side. Shri Mathur has further contended that the award of Rs. 15,000/- for the immeasureable mental agony and physical sufferings is also meagre which needs a suitable enhancement. Similarly, a paltry amount of Rs. 70,000/- has been awarded as compensation for loss of efficiency, permanent disability and loss of amenities and pleasure throughout life cannot be termed as just and fair compensation, which should also be enhanced suitably. 8. 15,000/- for the immeasureable mental agony and physical sufferings is also meagre which needs a suitable enhancement. Similarly, a paltry amount of Rs. 70,000/- has been awarded as compensation for loss of efficiency, permanent disability and loss of amenities and pleasure throughout life cannot be termed as just and fair compensation, which should also be enhanced suitably. 8. On the other hand, Shri S. C. Srivastava has asserted that the amount of compensation granted by the learned Tribunal is just, fair and equitable, which does not warrant any increase. 9. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions made before me. On the day of the accident, the appellant was a young boy of 10 years. He was a student of class III. As per injury report Ex. 3 and discharge certificate issued by SMS Hospital. Jaipur, Ex. 6, it stands well established that he had received extensive crush injuries on his right and left hands including compound fractures of right humerus and proximal end of the shaft of ulna and dislocation of the right elbow joint. 10. AW3 Dr. Madhav Upadhaya deposed that middle and index fingers of appellant's left hand were amputed, that there was fixed deformation and permanent disability upto 80 degree in his right elbow, and that the appellant's disability would increase with his growth. As per the certificate Ex. 139 issued by Shri H. R. Jhunjhunuwala, Orthopaedic Surgeon of the Bombay Hospital, Bombay, the appellant was medically treated at Bombay Hospital for injuries to his right elbow, which had compound fracture, that he was operated upon and also subjected to skin grafting, that he has 30-90 degree flexion of elbow and has no supination and pronation, that his right wrist is still stiff and right hand grip is incomplete and markedly weak; that he has Volkmann's ischaemic contracture of forearm and right ulnar nerve distribution of right hand x-ray revealed loss of hand of radius. Thus, the right elbow of the appellant has become unstable. The doctor has testified that the appellant should be considered for partial final, permanent disability of 50%. Appellant's photograph Ex. 138 faithfully demonstrates the afore mentioned permanent disability. 11. Appellant Basant Kumar (AW1) deposed that he sustained injuries in the accident and that now he cannot work from his right hand. The doctor has testified that the appellant should be considered for partial final, permanent disability of 50%. Appellant's photograph Ex. 138 faithfully demonstrates the afore mentioned permanent disability. 11. Appellant Basant Kumar (AW1) deposed that he sustained injuries in the accident and that now he cannot work from his right hand. AW2 Mahaveer Prasad, father of the appellant, has also deposed likewise He stated that he has incurred an amount of Rs. 70,000/- for treatment of the appellant at Jaipur and Bombay Hospital. He has proved injury and X-ray reports, medical prescriptions, medical bills, air journey tickets etc. Nothing substantial has been elicited in his cross examination to discredit his testimony regarding the quantum of compensation. From the evidence it stands well proved that due to the carelessness and actionable negligence on the part of the driver (respondent No. 1) of the offending Tanker, the appellant, has sustained extensive, serious and grievous injuries on his right and left hands resulting into amputation of the middle and index fingers of his lect hand and permanent disability of his right hand due to ulnar nerve palsy leading to anaesthesia over ulnar nerve distribution of his right hand and thereby his right hand has now become completely atrophied. For his entire life, the appellant shall not be in a position to use his right hand either for writing or for lifting any weight as his right hand grip is incomplete and markedly weak. Thus, the integrity of the appellant has been permanently impaired. The appellant had to be hospitalised as indoor patient SMS Hospital Jaipur and thereafter in Bombay Hospital, Bombay from 4-3-87 to 13-3-87, 18-3-87 to 2-4-87 and again from 20-6-87 to 13-7-87. The appellant was taken to Bombay by air flight. Since he is a minor, his father had to accompany him. Therefore, keeping in view the fender age of the injured appellant, severity of his injuries, consequential degree of permanent disablement and incapacitation, shortened expectency of his life, loss of amenities and enjoyment in life and the immeasureable pain and suffering besides mental agony, to my mind, the amount of Rs. 15,000/- as compensation is niggardly very small and hopelessly on the lower side. Therefore, keeping in view all the relevant facts, it will be just and proper to enhance this amount of compensation under this head from Rs. 15,000/- to Rs. 40,000/-. 15,000/- as compensation is niggardly very small and hopelessly on the lower side. Therefore, keeping in view all the relevant facts, it will be just and proper to enhance this amount of compensation under this head from Rs. 15,000/- to Rs. 40,000/-. The special damages under the head, medical treatment expenses for nutrition diet and other related expenses amounting to Rs. 40,000/- as also the lumpsum amount of Rs. 70,000/- granted by the learned Tribunal for loss of future income etc., to the appellant appears to be just, fair and proper. However, the interest allowed @ 10% per annum is also on the lower side and it should be 12% per annum from the date of filing of lie claim petition. 12. In the result, this appeal is partly Awed and the impugned Award dated 27-5-8 passed by the Tribunal while maintaining compensation amounts of Rs. 40,000/- as Special damages for medical expenses for treatment and nutrition diet, and Rs. 70,000/- for loss of amenities, inconvenience, efficiency, and enjoyment or the life and loss to income, is modified by enhancing the compensation for mental and physical agony permanent disablement and incapacitation from Rs. 15,000/- to Rs. 40,000/-. Thus, in all the appellant is entitled to get compensation for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- (one lac fifty thousands) with interest 3-12% per annum thereon from the toe of filing the claim petition till realisation. Costs are made easy.Appeal partly/Showed. *******