1. The claim as allowed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal stands reduced in the appeal preferred by the respondent no 2-Oriental Insurance Company which appeal was decided by a learned Single Judge of this court on 13th Aug 99. This reduction in the amount of compensation is being challenged in this appeal. 2. A child of seven years met with an accident. This fact is not being disputed. It is also not being disputed that the vehicle which was responsible for the accident was insured with the respondent Insurance Company. The tribunal awarded Rs. 2,24,500 /- as compensation. In appeal the amount stands reduced to Rs. 85,000 /- interest at the rate of 12 persent has been allowed it is. as indicated above, the reduction made in amount of compensation which is subject matter of challenge in this appeal preferred under clause 12 of the letters patent. 3. The learned counsel for the respondents urges that when the case out of which this appeal has arisen was decided then in another appeal the principle of law which was made applicable in the present case and was applied in the second case and when that decision has been sustained in appeal decided by a division bench of this court in LPA (C) No. 48/99 decided on 10th Nov 99, then the ratio of decision given in the aforesaid appeal should apply to the facts of this case also. 4. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and after having gone through the decision the given in LPA ( C ) 48 / 99, referred to above we are of the opinion that there is a slight distinction in (he fads of this case and the facts of the case which was decided earlier on which reliance has been placed by the respondent company. The age of the deceased in that case was four years and in the present case the age is seven years. Taking into consideration this fact and also the decision given by the Supreme Court in the case of Nagappa Mahadev Doddamani versus New India Assurance Co . Ltd. (1998) 9 SCC 271. The age of the deceased in that case was four years and in the present case the age is seven years. Taking into consideration this fact and also the decision given by the Supreme Court in the case of Nagappa Mahadev Doddamani versus New India Assurance Co . Ltd. (1998) 9 SCC 271. we are of the opinion that a maginal increase can be made in the quantum of compensation, the short judgment given by the Supreme Court in the above case reads as under: " We are unable to uphold the High Courts judgment reducing the amount of compensation from Rs. one lack to Rs. 80,000 for no cogent reasons. It is settled that in appeal interference is made with the quantum of compensation only on the ground of inadequacy or the same being too excessive as the case may be. Obviously in this case, the amount of Rs. one lack could not be called too excessive nor was that the view taken by the High Court which merely reduced the amount to Rs. 80,000/- without giving any supporting reason to satisfy the legal requirement. The High Courts judgment is therefore set aside. The appeal is allowed. The tribunals award of Rs one lack as compensation together with interest 6% is restored with costs throughout". We accordingly fix, the compensation at Rs one lack the rate of interest would remain the same let the compensation amount as now fixed be deposited with the Registrar Judicial of this court within a period of two month from today. In case, the amount of compensation as awared by the learned single judge stands already deposited, then the enhanced amount would be deposited with the aforesaid officer within the period stipulated above. In case this is not done, then the rate of interest would be 15 persent on the enhanced amount. The amount would be deposited in a fixed deposit account for a period of six month and the receipt would be handed over to the claimants on proper verification.