CHIDANANDA ULLAL, J. ( 1 ) THIS is a claimant's appeal to challenge the judgment and award dated 11-2-1992 in M. V. C. No. 1591 of 1988 passed by the motor accidents claims tribunal viii, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the mact for short ). In passing the same, as against the claim of Rs. 2,50,000/-, the mact had awarded a global compensation of Rs. 42,500/- together with interest at 6% p. a. ( 2 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant while taking me through the facts of the case and further the impugned judgment, argued that in passing the impugned judgment, the mact had awarded in all a sum of Rs. 42,500/- under the following heads. (I) general damages: Rs. 35,000/- (ii) medical expenses: Rs. 3,0007- (iii) conveyance and nourishment: Rs. 1,500/- (iv) for loss of studies for one year: Rs. 3,000/- ( 3 ) IT is submitted by Sri subramanya that the award of compensation under the head 'general damages' to the tune of Rs. 35,000/- is on the lower side, particularly when the appellant before the mact claimed that he was a student pursuing his ii year b. sc. Degree class and that the evidence of the doctor-witness was to the effect that the appellant- claimant had lost vision in his left eye and that injury had also resulted in loss of his memory power. On going through the evidence on record, it is seen therein that in the evidence of the doctor-witness that there is overall disability to an extent of 30% in the appellant- claimant, in the total loss of vision in his left eye. The mact had awarded a sum of Rs. 35,0007- on that count and as it had been pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned mact had awarded the said sum, as no authority was cited before it. Even when the matter is before this court, the learned counsel for the appellant could not reach a decision applicable to the facts in hand to substantiate his argument. He had cited before me dharma pal madhok v sharwan singh and others , wherein a law officer working in police department had lost his left eye, teeth and suffered complete disfiguration of the face resulting in suffering of the appellant claimant. He had cited before me dharma pal madhok v sharwan singh and others , wherein a law officer working in police department had lost his left eye, teeth and suffered complete disfiguration of the face resulting in suffering of the appellant claimant. In that case, the disability as per medical evidence was to an extent of 40% and the computation of the award was enhanced from Rs. 55,0007- to Rs. 2,50,000/ -. In another case in 1996 0 ACJ 372, where a commercial assistant working in swiss embassy had lost right eye, the compensation was enhanced from Rs. 66,200/- to a sum of Rs. 2,00,0007- and yet another decision of the division bench of Punjab and Haryana High Courtin 1995 0 ACJ 1048, wherein in a civil writ petition, an infant baby had lost its eye due to the negligence of the doctors and the division bench of that court had awarded a global compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/ -. ( 4 ) PER contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-ksrtc had cited before me AIR 1979 kant. 58, wherein there was a claim by a casual worker for loss of one eye where the compensation of Rs. 19,200/- awarded by the mact, was enhanced by this court to Rs. 25,560/- and ahmedabad municipal corporation and another v niranjan ambalal patel and others, wherein the division bench of the gujarat high court had awarded in a case where a ii year b. com. Student who had lost his vision and there was brain damage, the global compensation was enhanced to Rs. 62,530/ -. ( 5 ) OUT of the above decisions cited by both sides, it appears to me that the decision of the gujarat high court in niranjan ambalal patel, better be taken as a guide. The said decision is of the year 1981, whereas the instant case in hand came to be decided in the year 1994. All the more, the facts and circumstances of the instant case in hand and the facts and circumstances of the case in the said case in niranjan ambalal patel, are similar, as i see. ( 6 ) IN that view of the matter, i feel that the computation of compensation of Rs. 35,000/- in passing the impugned judgment and award has to be enhanced. ( 7 ) NOW the point is as to what extent the said sum can be enhanced. ( 6 ) IN that view of the matter, i feel that the computation of compensation of Rs. 35,000/- in passing the impugned judgment and award has to be enhanced. ( 7 ) NOW the point is as to what extent the said sum can be enhanced. In the above reported case, the global compensation was awarded by the gujarat high court at Rs. 62,530/ -. By reckoning the circumstances that the money value has substantially come down, I am of the view that if a global compensation of rs, 1,00,000/- is awarded, the same would be just and proper compensation to the appellant-claimant in the case. ( 8 ) THEREFORE, i pass the following: (I) the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned mact holding that the driver of the ksrtc bus was guilty of rash and negligent manner of driving his bus bearing registration No. Caf 549 resulting in the injuries to the appellant-claimant is upheld. (II) the finding of the mact that the respondent-ksrtc is liable to compensate the appellant-claimant is also upheld. However, the computation of the award of Rs. 42,500/- stands modified to Rs. 1,00,000/- together with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition down to the date of payment of the same to the appellant-claimant. ( 9 ) THE respondent-ksrtc is directed to pay the above sum together with interest within a period of 8 weeks from this day by giving deduction for any sum or sums deposited either before this court or before the mact below. ( 10 ) THE registry is also directed to transmit the records of the mact below at the earliest. ( 11 ) THE appeal therefore stands allowed, but in part in the above terms. No cost. --- *** --- .