Judgment :- This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellant against the Award and Decree dated 25.01.2000 made in MACTOP No.3954 of 1996 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (III Small Causes Court, Chennai). 2. The background facts in a nutshell are as follows:- The injured boy/claimant, met with an accident on 010. 1996 at about 6.00 p.m., while he was standing on the southern side of the road and walking from east to west. At that time a Bajaj Motor Cycle bearing Registration No.T.N.04.D.3352 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner from east to west dashed against the appellant/injured boy. Due to the accident the injured boy lost his right eye vision, disfiguration of face and also sustained injuries all over his body. The injured boy being a minor represented by his mother claimed a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation before the Tribunal. After considering the materials and evidence available on record, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.90,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of petition. Aggrieved, the claimant has preferred the present appeal. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/ claimant submitted that the Tribunal has awarded a meagre compensation against the claim of Rs.4,00,000/- and ought to have awarded a reasonable compensation. This is a fit case for enhancement and the award passed by the Tribunal is without basis and justification. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company/second respondent submitted that the Tribunal has considered all the relevant materials and came to the right conclusion and awarded a compensation of Rs.90,000/-which is just, fair and reasonable and it is in accordance with law. 5. Heard the learned counsel on either side. On the side of the appellant/claimant, P.Ws.1 to 5 were examined and documents Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.9 were marked. P.W.1 is the mother of the injured boy. P.W.2 is the Doctor Mr.J.R.R.Thiagarajan. P.W.3 is the Doctor Mr. Rajappa. P.W.4 is Mr. Mohamed Yusouf, Sub Inspector. P.W.5 is the injured boy/claimant. Ex.P1 is the Discharge certificate. Ex.P2 is the Out Patient Slip.. Ex.P.3 Eye Hospital Out Patient Slip. Ex.P4 is the School Certificate. Ex.P5 is the Disability Certificate issued by the Doctor,P.W.2. Ex.P.6 is the X-ray Report. Ex.P.7 is the Disability Certificate issued by the Eye Doctor. Ex.P8 is the First Information Report. Ex.P9 is the Rough Sketch. Ex.P1 is the Discharge certificate. Ex.P2 is the Out Patient Slip.. Ex.P.3 Eye Hospital Out Patient Slip. Ex.P4 is the School Certificate. Ex.P5 is the Disability Certificate issued by the Doctor,P.W.2. Ex.P.6 is the X-ray Report. Ex.P.7 is the Disability Certificate issued by the Eye Doctor. Ex.P8 is the First Information Report. Ex.P9 is the Rough Sketch. On the side of the Insurance company, no witnesses were examined and no documents were marked. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.90,000/-with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of petition. The details of compensation are as follows:- Transport to Hospital, Extra Nourishment & Damage of Dress materials : Rs. 5,000/- Pain and Sufferings : Rs.10,000/- Permanent disability : Rs.50,000/- Loss of earning power : Rs.25,000/- Total : Rs.90,000/- With interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of claim petition. 6. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-towards Transport to Hospital, Extra Nourishment and Damage of Dress materials. Taking into consideration of the nature of injuries and the duration of treatment as out patient based on Exs.P.1 and P2 and P.W.2, it is reasonable to award a consolidated sum of Rs.10,000/- under these heads. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards mental agony and torture, due to loss of vision in right eye and disfiguration of face. There is no dispute regarding the accident and the injuries sustained by the claimant and hence it would be reasonable to award a sum of Rs.25,000/- under this head. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head of "Loss of Marital Alliance and amenities". Because of loss of vision and other injuries and prospect of getting married is not very bright and also it is necessary to compensate for loss of marital alliance and amenities. The suffering of the injured is on account of loss of eye sight which is going to be through out his life time. Hence he cannot enjoy the amenities of life as another normally person can. While fixing compensation for loss of amenities of life, the features like loss of eye sight and unusual deprivation he has undertaken in his life have to be reckoned. The Supreme Court in the case of R.D. Hattangadi Vs. Hence he cannot enjoy the amenities of life as another normally person can. While fixing compensation for loss of amenities of life, the features like loss of eye sight and unusual deprivation he has undertaken in his life have to be reckoned. The Supreme Court in the case of R.D. Hattangadi Vs. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd., 1995 (1) SCC 551 , had formulated certain guidelines to award compensation under different heads which reads as under:- "9. Broadly speaking while fixing an amount of compensation payable to a victim of an accident, the damages have to be assessed separately as pecuniary damages and special damages. Pecuniary damages are those which the victim has actually incurred and which are capable of being calculated in terms of money; whereas non-pecuniary damages are those which are incapable of being assessed by arithmetical calculations. In order to appreciate two concepts pecuniary damages may include expenses incurred by the claimant: (i) medical attendance; (ii) loss of earning of profit up to the date of trial; (iii) other material loss. So far non-pecuniary damages are concerned, they may include (i) damages for mental and physical shock, pain and suffering, already suffered or likely to be suffered in future; (ii) damages to compensate for the loss of amenities of life which may include a variety of matters i.e. on account of injury the claimant may not be able to walk, run or sit; (iii) damages for the loss of expectation of life, i.e., on account of injury the normal longevity of the person concerned is shortened; (iv) inconvenience, hardship, discomfort, disappointment, frustration and mental stress in life." The above judgment of the Supreme Court has been followed by the Supreme Court in the subsequent decision in the case of Divisional Controller, KSRTC Vs. Mahadeva Shetty, 2003 (7) SCC 197 , wherein it has been held as under:- "18. A person not only suffers injuries on account of accident but also suffers in mind and body on account of the accident throughout his life and a feeling is developed that he is no more a normal man and cannot enjoy the amenities of life as another normal person can. A person not only suffers injuries on account of accident but also suffers in mind and body on account of the accident throughout his life and a feeling is developed that he is no more a normal man and cannot enjoy the amenities of life as another normal person can. While fixing compensation for pain and suffering as also for loss of amenities of life, features like his age, marital status and unusual deprivation he has undertaken in his life have to be reckoned." In view of the above, it would be appropriate and reasonable to award a sum of Rs.40,000/- under the head "Loss of marital alliance and amenities". In respect of pain and suffering, the Tribunal has awarded only Rs.10,000/-. In view of the handicap and the nature of injuries, it would be appropriate and reasonable to award a further sum of Rs.10,000/- under this head. The Tribunal has awarded only Rs.50,000/- towards permanent disability. Taking into consideration of the nature of injuries and the disability assessed at 40% by the Doctor as per Exs.P7 and P5, it would be appropriate and reasonable to award a further sum of Rs.20,000/-under this head. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- under the head of loss of earning power when it awarded a sum towards permanent disability which is not proper in view of the Full Bench Decision of this Court reported in 2006(4)CTC 433 [Cholan Roadways Corporation Ltd., vs. Ahmed Thambi and others]. Hence, the amount of Rs.25,000/-under the head "loss of earning power" is liable to be set aside and accordingly it is set aside. Hence the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as under:- Transport to Hospital, Extra Nourishment & Damage of Dress materials : Rs. 10,000/-Mental agony and torture due to loss of vision in right eye and disfiguration of face : Rs. 25,000/- Loss of Marital alliance and amenities : Rs. 40,000/-Pain and Sufferings : Rs. 20,000/-Permanent disability : Rs. 70,000/- Total : Rs.1,65,000/- Therefore, the claimant is entitled to the enhanced compensation of Rs.75,000/-(Rs.1,65,000 - Rs.90,000) with interest at 7.5 % per annum from the date of petition. 7. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.75,000/- with 7.5% interest from the date of petition, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.75,000/- with 7.5% interest from the date of petition, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the present case, the injured was minor at the time of accident. The date of accident was 010. 1996. At that time the age of the boy was 8 years. As on today he is a major. Hence, on deposit of the enhanced amount by the Insurance Company, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount from the deposit. 8. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of with the above modification. No costs.