ORDER Bhawani Singh, C.J. 1. Both the appeals (M.A. No. 985/98 - Sudhir Kumar v. Pramod Kumar and Anr., and M.A. No. 999/98 - Ramgopal v. Pramod Kumar and Anr.) are proposed to he decided by this common judgment, as the question for determination is almost the same arising out of the same accident, though the Claims Tribunal has decided by separate awards passed in Claim Case No. 15/96 and Claim Case No. 14/96. 2. Sudhir Kumar and Ramgopal (father) were on Rajdoot Motorcycle. They were going to village Kamthi. On 25-10-1995 at about 5 p.m., when they reached near village Mahuwa, Pramod Kumar (non-claimant No. 1) driving the truck rashly and negligently, hit the motor-cycle. The claimants in both the cases, suffered injuries. Both the claimants were shifted to the Hospital at Pipariya, wherefrom they were shifted to Jabalpur and they were admitted in private hospital. Sudhir Kumar (Claimant) remained unconscious for 20 days due to head injury and also lost memory. That apart, there was fracture in the right leg and for treatment of which, iron rod had been inserted. For shifting him to hospital at Jabalpur, he spent Rs. 2000/- on four persons. During the year 1995-96, he could not do well in agriculture and dairy on account of the accident, as a result of which, he sustained loss of Rs. One Lakh. He had to engage two labourers for this purpose against payment of Rs. 400/-each. He incurred medical expenses of Rs. 41,385/-, Rs. 9000/- for doctor fee and Rs. 3000/- for special diet. Future loss towards deformity is of Rs. 3,36,000/-and for pain and suffering Rs. 10,000/-, total compensation claimed Rs. 4,99,385/-. 3. Ramgopal (Claimant) sustained fracture in right leg, for treatment of which, iron rod has been inserted. Deformity has occurred on leg as a result of the accident, for which there is no permanent treatment. In addition to service, he was engaged in agricultural work. Due to this accident, he sustained loss of Rs. One Lakh. During the year 1995-96, Rs. 800/- per month had to be spent on skilled labour, he had to employ. He incurred Rs. 10,091/- for medical expenses in private hospital, Rs. 5,000/- for doctor fee, Rs. 2000/- for special diet, loss towards agriculture Rs. 50,000/-, Rs. 2,49,200/- for future loss in agriculture, pain and suffering for Rs. One Lakh, Rs. During the year 1995-96, Rs. 800/- per month had to be spent on skilled labour, he had to employ. He incurred Rs. 10,091/- for medical expenses in private hospital, Rs. 5,000/- for doctor fee, Rs. 2000/- for special diet, loss towards agriculture Rs. 50,000/-, Rs. 2,49,200/- for future loss in agriculture, pain and suffering for Rs. One Lakh, Rs. 2,000/- for shifting him to hospital at Jabalpur for medical check up and Rs. 15,000/- for damages to motor-cycle, total compensation claimed Rs. 4,33,690/-. 4. The defence taken is that accident had not taken place as alleged. The truck was being driven safely. The motor-cycle was being driven rashly and negligently. As a result, it went on the road side. The claimants lost control and the same slipped away while the truck had passed away. The claimants are not engaged in agriculture. Other averments have also been denied. 5. Similarly, the Insurance Company has denied the case of the claimants. The vehicle was not involved in the accident, without which, the claim petition could not be entertained and decided. 6. The Claims Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the truck and not the motor cycle, which resulted in fracture in the right leg of Sudhir Kumar (claimant) and the treatment was possible by insertion of iron rod. It is also found that 50% disability has taken place in his right leg besides occurrence of deformity. Therefore, claimant has been awarded Rs. 50,000/-. Towards medical expenditure, he has been awarded Rs. 40,000/-. The compensation carries interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till realisation. Cost of Rs. 200/- has also been awarded. 7. The finding of the Tribunal in the case of Ramgopal (claimant) is the same and with respect to the injury, it is found that there was fracture in his right leg, for the treatment of which, iron rod had to be inserted and deformity had occurred in it. This claimant has been awarded Rs. 30,000/- for 25% disability in the right leg, half centimeter shortening of leg. This apart, Rs. 8,000/- has been awarded towards medical expenses apart from Rs. 200/-by way of cost. Both the claimants are not satisfied with the award of the Tribunal, hence these appeals. 8. This claimant has been awarded Rs. 30,000/- for 25% disability in the right leg, half centimeter shortening of leg. This apart, Rs. 8,000/- has been awarded towards medical expenses apart from Rs. 200/-by way of cost. Both the claimants are not satisfied with the award of the Tribunal, hence these appeals. 8. Shri Narendra Sharma, learned counsel for the claimants, submits that the Claims Tribunal has not awarded just compensation in the cases. Looking to the seriousness of injuries, percentage thereof, deformity, mental agony and loss of income suffered by the claimants, compensation amount is liable to be enhanced. 9. Shri Sanjay Agrawal, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, submits that just compensation has been awarded on the basis of evidence produced before the Claims Tribunal. The injuries are not serious in nature and no evidence with respect to any injury had been adduced nor it is proved that after the accident, Sudhir Kumar lost memory nor there is any evidence to show satisfactorily that due to the accident, there was loss to the income of the claimants. Both the claimants have been cured of the injuries; therefore, taking into all these factors, award is liable to be maintained. 10. Evidence suggests that Sudhir Kumar sustained not only foot injury, but also head injury. The fracture was so serious that iron rod has to be inserted. He could not be treated in the hospital nearby the place of accident due to the seriousness of injury and was shifted to Jabalpur and treated at private hospital. Injury to foot has been established from the statement of Dr. Hakimmuddin. But there is no reason why the statement of claimant with respect to head injury be doubted. It is also reflected in the medical certificate available on record, which states that the injuries were located on the skull 4.5" x 2" bone deep. There was bleeding and he remained unconscious for 20 days as per the statement. The Claims Tribunal has not appreciated the nature of the injury and did not pay attention to the statement of claimants on this aspect presumably on the ground that the Doctor did not refer to this injury. We think, this omission has caused miscarriage of justice in this case. The Claims Tribunal has not appreciated the nature of the injury and did not pay attention to the statement of claimants on this aspect presumably on the ground that the Doctor did not refer to this injury. We think, this omission has caused miscarriage of justice in this case. This apart, seriousness of injury to the foot and nature of treatment received by the claimants further demonstrate that he must have suffered severe pain during the course of treatment, entitling him to suitable compensation. Therefore, in the totality of the circumstances, it is a fit case for enhancement of compensation. Accordingly, compensation amount is enhanced to Rs. 75,000/-, in addition to Rs. 40,000/- paid towards medical expenses. The enhanced compensation amount would carry interest at the rate already allowed by the Claims Tribunal payable from the same date. 11. Ramgopal (claimant in M.A. No. 999/98) has been paid Rs. 30,000/- only. We notice that he sustained injury to the right leg, which had to be treated by application of iron rod, there is shortening of leg of half centimeter. For this treatment, nailing operation had also to be resorted to. All this, obviously, goes to show that he suffered severe paid due to the accident. Consequently, we enhance compensation to Rs. 63,000/- in addition to Rs. 8000/- paid towards medical expenses. The enhanced compensation amount would carry interest at the same rate allowed by the Tribunal payable from the same date. The respondents are directed to pay the enhanced amount of compensation to the claimants with interest within a period of two months from today. 12. Both the appeals (M.A. No. 985/98 and M.A. No. 999/98) succeed and are hereby allowed as indicated above. The party shall bear their own costs.