JUDGMENT Lakshman Uraon, J. 1. This letters patent appeal has been preferred against the order and judgment dated 15.12.1997 passed by the learned Single Judge in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 467/91 (R) arising out of Compensation Case No. 32/1986 of Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-2nd Addl. District Judge, Jamshedpur, enhancing the amount of compensation from Rs. 27,000/- to Rs. 2,00000/- to be paid with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application of the claimant by the opposite party-respondent-appellant. The New India Assurance Company Limited. 2. The claimant-appellant-respondent, Jaswinder Singh, was practising for national level cyclist and sports-man along with other sports-men on 29.4.1986 at about 5.30 a.m. when he had reached near Sonari Circuit House, Link Road, an Ambassador car bearing registration No. WBC-2185 came from opposite direction, which was being driven rashly and negligently and even without blowing horn or giving light signal, dashed against the claimant as a result of which he was severally injured and sustained compound fracture injury on his left leg besides other injuries. The claimant-appellant-respondent was aged about 16 years. He was taken to Tata Main Hospital for treatment where he was operated upon and was under treatment for about 8 months. He was discharged sometime in the month of December 1986. Due to the accident, the claimant, thus, became permanently disabled. He filed claim petition for Rs. 4,00000/- as compensation on the ground that his whole career as an athlete has been ruined. 3. The learned Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal-cum-2nd Addl. District Judge, Jamshedpur, on the evidence available on the record granted compensation of Rs. 27,000/- to the claimant, payable by the insurance company, opposite party- respondent- appellant No. 3. 4. Being not satisfied with the said meagre amount of compensation of Rs. 27,000/-, Jaswinder Singh, applicant-respondent-appellant, filed miscellaneous appeal bearing No. 467/1991 (R). The learned Single Judge by order dated 15.12.1997 considered the future prospect of the claimant coupled with mental agony and physical pain suffered by him. The evidence of Doctor of Tata Main Hospital, Jamshedpur also proved that the claimant remained in hospital for about seven months and numerous operations were performed on his fractured, leg. The claimant suffered compound fracture of middle third of tibia and fibula with extensive cut. The evidence of Doctor of Tata Main Hospital, Jamshedpur also proved that the claimant remained in hospital for about seven months and numerous operations were performed on his fractured, leg. The claimant suffered compound fracture of middle third of tibia and fibula with extensive cut. Since the claimant had adopted his career as an athlete and as per evidence of the Doctor, AW-4, he became totally incapable to become an athlete and thus his whole career was ruined. Considering the evidence, the learned Single Judge held that the career which was adopted by the claimant in his prime age, was completely ruined. His father, AW-5 was also an eminent sportsman and he was a recipient of Arjuna Award and was also national coach of the national cyclist. Hence the learned Single Judge opined that it was not unusual for the claimant to adopt his career as an athlete. Considering all these facts and circumstances in which the claimant suffered pain and mental agony and became disabled at the prime age of 16 years who has now become idle. Hence the compensation awarded by the learned Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal was enhanced from Rs. 27,000/- to Rs. 2,00000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application of the claimant. 5. The learned counsel for the opposite party-respondent- appellant, The New India Assurance Company Limited, has submitted that the claimant has not become totally disabled although he has become incapable of being an athlete. He has not suffered any permanent disability as he sustained only compound fracture of middle third of tibia and fibula. The learned Single Judge assumed that the injured will never be a successful athlete in future. His theory is not applicable in the instant case. He has submitted that the learned Single Judge while fixing the quantum of compensation, has failed to consider the provisions of Section 168 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, for awarding just compensation and has also relied upon a case reported in AIR 2002 SCW 259 and has submitted that the insurance company has not taken any higher liability by accepting a higher premium for payment of compensation to a third party. The insurance company would be liable to the extent limited under Section 95, Sub-section (2) of the Act and would not be liable to pay the entire amount. The insurance company would be liable to the extent limited under Section 95, Sub-section (2) of the Act and would not be liable to pay the entire amount. The liability of the insurance company can be statutory or contractual. The statutory liability can not be more than what is required under the statute itself. However, there is nothing in Section 95 of the Act prohibiting the parties from contracting to create unlimited or higher liability to cover wider risk. 6. Before the learned Single Judge the insurance policy regarding the unlimited liability of the insurance company to pay the compensation has not been placed. Hence at this appellate stage the unlimited liability to pay the compensation has been enhanced by the learned Single Judge to the tune of Rs. 2,00000/-, could not be substantiated. 7. However, after hearing both the parties it is now clear that the claimant, Jaswinder Singh, was an athlete aged about 16 years. He was likely to attend the coaching centre. His father was also an athlete and recipient of Arjuna Award. The injuries sustained by the claimant has deprived him in taking part in any athletics. His career as an athlete has been ruined. His father was a athlete, Arjuna Award recipient and national coach of the national cyclist. Hence there was every possibility that the claimant would have chosen his career as an athlete. However, he has not been completely disabled rather he has been deprived of participating in any athletics. There is other course open to him for his livelihood i.e. by technical or general education to seek an employment for his better career. In view of this fact I think that the amount of compensation enhanced from Rs. 27,000/- to Rs. 2,00000/- by the learned Single Judge, is not convincing to me. On the other hand, I think it proper that if the amount is enhanced from Rs. 27,000/- to Rs. 1,00000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the application of the claimant will meet the ends of justice. 8. With this modification this letters patent appeal is disposed of. The opposite party-respondent-appellant, The New India Assurance Company Limited, is directed to pay the amount of compensation of Rs. 1,00000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application of the claimant, deducting the amount already paid, within three months. 8. With this modification this letters patent appeal is disposed of. The opposite party-respondent-appellant, The New India Assurance Company Limited, is directed to pay the amount of compensation of Rs. 1,00000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application of the claimant, deducting the amount already paid, within three months. In the facts and circumstances of this case there is no order of any cost.