S. K. DUBEY, J. ( 1 ) APPELLANT-CLAIMANT has filed this appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded vide award dated 11. 7. 1995 passed in Claim Case No. 31 of 1991 by Vllth Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Bilaspur. ( 2 ) THE appellant aged 21 years, a student of Engineering College, was going on his Luna on 7. 12. 1989, which was dashed by bus No. MKL 6163, driven by respondent no. 2, owned by respondent No. 1 and insured with respondent No. 3. The appellant fell down and received severe injuries while his Luna was dragged by the bus for a long distance. As a result of multiple severe injuries, the appellant suffered traumatic paraplegia, resulting in physical permanent disability of 100 per cent. The Tribunal after holding that the accident was caused due to sole negligence of the bus driver awarded compensation of rs. 1,70,000 with interest thereon at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of application, i. e. , 4. 5. 90 till deposit. ( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant placing reliance on the decision of the supreme Court in R. D. Hattangadi v. Pest control (India) Pvt. Ltd. , 1995 ACJ 366 (SC) and Nagesha v. M. S. Krishna, 1998 acj 467 (SC), submitted that as the appellant has become completely crippled, the Tribunal ought to have awarded the compensation in full of Rs. 6,00,000 as claimed by the appellant. ( 4 ) MR. R. K. Thakur, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 submitted that the award is just and fair and not so inadequate so as to call for interference in appeal. ( 5 ) ADMITTEDLY, the appellant suffered severe injuries as a result of motor accident, because of which he was hospitalized and had also taken treatment in Bombay hospital where serious surgical operations were performed of spinal cord, but, his condition did not improve. He has been paralysed for life. The extent of permanent disablement is assessed at 100 per cent vide Exh. He has been paralysed for life. The extent of permanent disablement is assessed at 100 per cent vide Exh. P/209, therefore, looking to the nature of the injuries and misery of the life of the appellant due to permanent disability suffered and the fact that the appellant requires medical attention for the rest of his life and constant care by some other person even for his ordinary needs, taking into consideration the principles laid down by the Apex Court in R. D. Hattangadi's case, 1995 ACJ 366 (SC) and the decision of Apex Court in Nagesha v. M. S. Krishna, 1998 ACJ 467 (SC), which is similar to that of appellant, where the claimant was aged 23 years at the time the accident occurred in the year 1992 and the disablement was 95 per cent. Rs. 6,00,000 inclusive of interest were awarded, we are of the opinion that the award of Rs. 6,00,000 would be just and fair on which the appellant would also be entitled to interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the award, i. e. , from 11. 7. 1995 till deposit. ( 6 ) THE liability of the respondent No. 3 was unlimited as is evident from the policy. Therefore, the respondent No. 3 is directed to deposit the amount of Rs. 6,00,000 with interest as awarded by us, less the amount already deposited by it within a period of two months from the date of supply of certified copy failing which the interest from the date of the award passed by the tribunal on the amount of Rs. 6,00,000 shall be payable at the rate of 15 per cent per annum. On deposit the amount shall be disbursed to the appellant keeping in mind the well settled guidelines. ( 7 ) IN the result, the appeal is allowed with costs. Award of the Tribunal shall stand substituted as indicated hereinabove. Counsel's fee Rs. 1,000, if pre-certified. C. C. as per rules. Appeal allowed. .