Judgment ( 1. ) CLAIMANT is in appeal under section 173 of the Motor vehicles Act, 1988, against an award dated 1. 10. 2007 passed by learned Third additional Member, Motor Accidents Claims tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 36 of 2007. By the impugned award, the learned member of Claims Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs. 1,29,715 together with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of claim petition till realization for the injuries sustained by the claimant. According to claimant, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side and hence, need to be enhanced so as to make it reasonable, adequate, proper and in conformity with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. It is essentially for this reason, the claimant has filed this appeal claiming enhancement in the compensation. So the short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether any case for enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is made out and, if so, to what extent? ( 2. ) IN view of short controversy involved in the appeal, it is really not necessary to take note of the facts in detail except those which are necessary. It is also for the reason that the findings in relation to nature of accident, how it occurred, who was responsible for causing injury, liability, etc. are decided in favour of claimant by the tribunal. In the absence of any challenge to these findings by the respondents, by not filing any cross-appeal or cross-objection, these findings have become final. ( 3. ) THIS is a case of injury suffered by the claimant, Shyama Bai, aged 51 years, a housewife, in a vehicular accident that occurred on 23. 12. 2004 while she was travelling towards Mysore from Ooty in a bus. It was at that time, offending vehicle bearing No. TN 65-B 8712 owned by respondent No. 1, driven by respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No. 3 turned turtle in which she was travelling, causing serious injuries in her left hand (amputation of left hand below shoulder joint ). According to claimant, she was hospitalised for undergoing operations and she actually underwent operations in hospital. According to doctor, the permanent disability is to the extent of 80 per cent. It is according to claimant proved in evidence also. According to claimant, she was hospitalised for undergoing operations and she actually underwent operations in hospital. According to doctor, the permanent disability is to the extent of 80 per cent. It is according to claimant proved in evidence also. The claims Tribunal on appreciating the entire evidence adduced by the claimant awarded a total compensation of Rs. 1,29,715 for the injuries sustained by her, the expenses incurred, disability occurred and lastly for pain and suffering. It is this determination which is impugned by the claimant, being on lower side, hence, this appeal for enhancement. ( 4. ) HEARD Mr. G. K. Neema, the learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. P. K. Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, insurance company. ( 5. ) HAVING heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused record of the case, we are inclined to allow the appeal in part. ( 6. ) WE have gone through the evidence adduced by the claimant on the issue of injury sustained by her. In our opinion, taking into consideration the nature of injury, the extent of damage caused in her left hand to the extent of 80 per cent, which resulted in amputation of her left hand causing permanent disability in the body of appellant (claimant) as a result of which she is not as fit as she was prior to accident in her day-to-day work, resulting in reducing her capacity to a large extent to work, the expenditure incurred in receiving medical treatment in actual and to be incurred in future, the future loss and mental pain/ suffering suffered due to her involvement in accident and the disability occurred, we consider it proper to enhance in lump sum the compensation from Rs. 1,29,715 to rs. 3,50,000. In other words, in our view, the claimant is held entitled for a total sum of Rs. 3,50,000 by way of compensation for the injuries sustained by her. ( 7. ) IN our opinion, when left hand is amputated of any person to the extent of 80 per cent then one can imagine the plight of such person. She is completely dependent on her one hand only for the whole life. Her all enjoyments of life are gone. She is bound to spend all her life in frustration and becomes dependent on others. She is completely dependent on her one hand only for the whole life. Her all enjoyments of life are gone. She is bound to spend all her life in frustration and becomes dependent on others. It is for all these reasons and taking into consideration, the age of claimant (51), we consider it proper to enhance the compensation to Rs. 3,50,000. ( 8. ) THE compensation awarded to the claimant is a just, reasonable and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the law laid down by the Apex Court in these types of cases in relation to several heads taken note of supra with reference to evidence brought on record by the parties. Indeed in such cases, no fixed and any static formula as such is provided for determining the compensation and the same is required to be determined on the basis of totality of evidence adduced and the relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration as mentioned supra. It is on this basis, the courts have to work out award of reasonable compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained. ( 9. ) THE learned counsel for the appellant has cited some authorities for claiming enhancement. We have gone through these authorities. In our opinion and as observed supra, every case depends upon facts of each case and one can rely upon the cases for awarding compensation. Indeed taking into consideration these authorities and then applying the law so laid down to the facts of this case, we have arrived at the figure of enhanced compensation mentioned supra. ( 10. ) IN this view of the matter, the appeal succeeds and is allowed in part. Impugned award is modified to the extent indicated above. The enhanced sum will carry interest at the rate of 6 per cent per anum from the date of application till realization. All other findings are upheld being not under challenge. Counsels fee Rs. 500, if certified. Appeal partly allowed.