BHAWANI SINGH, C. J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the order of Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Burhanpur, dated 13. 3. 2000. On 23. 5. 1998, Jeeshan, student of class II of Nehru Montessory School, aged about 10 years along with Mohammad ismail, was going to his home (Sic. walking) extremely on the left side of the road at Burhanpur. At the relevant time one bajaj moped No. MP 12-C 6310 owned by respondent No. 3 and driven by respondent no. 2 came in excessive speed and hit mohammad Jeeshan, resulting in injuries to his left eye. He was admitted in Aditya jyoti Eye Hospital at Burhanpur and later at Bombay hospital. In the said accident minor boy Jeeshan lost his left eye completely. ( 2 ) CLAIMANT has filed the application through natural guardian for compensation against the respondents. Allegation is that accident took place due to rash and negligent driving by Abdul Aziz as a result of which Jeeshan lost his left eye in the said accident. Compensation of Rs. 2,00,000 has been claimed with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum. ( 3 ) ABDUL Aziz and Abdul Naeem remained absent and, therefore, the Claims tribunal proceeded ex parte against them. Accordingly, appellant sought permission under section 170 of the Motor Vehicles act, 1988 to avail the other defences. This application was allowed and the appellant raised defences on merits also. It submitted that driver was not holding the valid driving licence at the time of accident and the compensation sought was excessive looking to the age of minor being 8 to 10 years. ( 4 ) CLAIMS Tribunal considered the rival submissions put up by the parties and came to the conclusion that accident was caused as a result of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the vehicle as a result of which Jeeshan lost his left eye completely. ( 5 ) LOOKING to all the factors, compensation of Rs. 1,50,000 has been awarded plus Rs. 25,000 towards medical expenses, taking to total Rs. 1,75,000 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of application till realisation. Appellant is not satisfied with the award, hence this appeal. ( 6 ) MR. ( 5 ) LOOKING to all the factors, compensation of Rs. 1,50,000 has been awarded plus Rs. 25,000 towards medical expenses, taking to total Rs. 1,75,000 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of application till realisation. Appellant is not satisfied with the award, hence this appeal. ( 6 ) MR. S. K. Rao, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that Tribunal has committed an error in appreciating the evidence with respect to the accident and award of compensation. ( 7 ) WE do not find ourselves in agreement with the contentions so raised. Evidence clearly points out that the driver of the vehicle was responsible for commission of the accident since he was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently. Minor boy sustained injuries and lost his left eye completely. He was taking education in nehru Montessory School and as such there was every likelihood of his rising high in life. On account of loss of an eye, he incurred not only permanent disability but it affected his appearance and prospects of life to a great extent. Looking to all these factors we are of the opinion that the award of compensation in this case is quite just and proper and calls for no interference. ( 8 ) CONSEQUENTLY, the appeal is without merit and the same is, therefore, dismissed. Appeal dismissed. .