ORDER Pritinker Diwaker, J. 1. This appeal arises out of the award dated 5.10.2001 passed by the II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in claim case No. 42/01 whereby in an injury case compensation of Rs. 2.25 lacs has been awarded in favour of the injured-claimant. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 7.7.2000 when appellant/claimant, who was a student of Class-7th, was going to her school by riding bicycle, she was dashed by a truck bearing registration No. MBS 1365 (hereinafter referred to as "offending vehicle") resulting in number of grievous injuries to her. She was immediately taken to District Hospital, Raipur, from where she was taken to a private hospital - MMI Hospital, Raipur and considering her serious condition she was referred to Lilavati Hospital, Mumbai-where she remained hospitalized for more than 1 month and was operated several times. 2. A claim case was filed by the injured-claimant through her natural guardian father Shri Mangal Chand Baid claiming compensation of Rs. 10.35 lacs, inter alia, pleading that apart from the expenditure incurred on her treatment, she has also suffered 50% permanent disability; on account of injuries suffered by her in her stomach and pelvic region, it may be difficult for her to conceive and deliver a child and therefore, she is entitled for suitable compensation. 3. The respondents by filing a common written statement denied their liability on general grounds. They have also pleaded that the accident occurred due to negligent riding of the bicycle by the claimant and according to them, the claim as put forth by the claimant is exorbitant one. 4. By the impugned award the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs. 2.25 lacs in favour of the claimant with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of claim petition on the following heads: 1 For Medical expense Rs. 1,61,292/- 2 For Physical and Mental Pain (due to 50% permanent disability) Rs. 50,000/- 3 Misc. Expense i.e. attendant and others Rs. 13,000/- Total : Rs. 2,24,292/- Rounded off to Rs. 2.25 Lacs 5. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submits that the Tribunal has not properly considered the physical condition of the claimant and has awarded compensation on the lower side. 50,000/- 3 Misc. Expense i.e. attendant and others Rs. 13,000/- Total : Rs. 2,24,292/- Rounded off to Rs. 2.25 Lacs 5. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submits that the Tribunal has not properly considered the physical condition of the claimant and has awarded compensation on the lower side. He submits that under the conventional head like pain and suffering, separate compensation should have been awarded and it can not be clubbed with the amount awardable towards permanent disability. The Tribunal has also not awarded any compensation for nutritional diet, loss of amenities and loss of expectation of life. 6. On the other hand, supporting the impugned award it has been argued by counsel for the respondents that the Tribunal has already awarded interest @ 9% which is very much on the higher side and therefore, even assuming that under some of the conventional heads the amount awarded is on the lower side, the higher rate of interest @ 9% p.a. compensates the same. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. The claimant has examined as many as four witnesses to prove her case. AW-1 Mangal Chand Baid, father of the claimant, in his evidence has first described the manner in which her daughter/claimant suffered injuries and then has further stated that she was taken to various hospitals including Lilavati Hospital, Mumbai. He has stated that she was hospitalized at MMI Hospital, Raipur for 15 days and thereafter, at Mumbai she was first taken to Jaslok Hospital and then to Lilavati Hospital where she was treated for about 45 days. He has further stated that as the claimant had suffered injuries near her private part, the doctor had informed him that she is going to face much problem in her marriage as also in delivery. 9. The claimant was examined as AW-4. She has stated as to how she suffered injuries. She has further stated that she goes to school by rickshaw and it is the rickshaw puller who after taking her down from rickshaw drops her at her class room; the teachers of the school also help her and she feels difficulty in walking and performing physical work. 10. AW-2 Dr. Tribhuvan Nath Malhotra was one of the members of the team of doctors who had examined the injured claimant. He has given medical report Ex. 10. AW-2 Dr. Tribhuvan Nath Malhotra was one of the members of the team of doctors who had examined the injured claimant. He has given medical report Ex. P/111, which reads as under: "MEDICAL REPORT This is to certify that we have examined Ku. Khushboo baid aged 15 years and her medical records. The girl after a road traffic accident, in which her pelvis was fractured at various places, which has now united, resulting in a contracted pelvis. The contraction of Pelvis is more marked in the middle pelvis. Although the girl has another two to two & half years of growth but there are no chances that her pelvis will attain-normal diameters. Particularly in the crucial middle segment where the interspinous diameter is almost half of what is standard in small size females. 5.5 cms as against 9.99 cms in her obstetrical life she will have to undergo caesarian section due to this contraction & subsequent cephalopelvic disproportion. The tear in the rectum, which has been repaired due to adhesions and closeness to vagina, will cause problems but these will come to light only after her marriage. She has developed a defective gait which she tries to control, this will cause muscle fatigue and pain etc in later life. The internal examination has not been done. This report is on the basis of the patient, her available medical records and recent x ray plates and the report of the radiologist. Dr. T.N. MEHROTRA MS (Anatomy) DEAN (Retd.) Pt. JNM Medical College, Raipur, Regn. No. 77 Dr. MAMTA JINDAL MD (Obst. & Gyn) Gold Medalist Consultant Obstretecian & Gynecologist Regn. No. 9654" The team of doctors has also given average pelvic measurement in centimeters describing the pelvic condition of the claimant. In his court statement he has stated that considering the injuries sustained by the claimant in her pelvic region, even if she gets pregnant, there would hardly be any chance for rotation of the child in the womb and even her walking style has become defective and with the passage of time, it will get worse. 11. AW-3 Dr. A.S. Saifi has issued permanent disability certificate Ex. P/11 in favour of the claimant stating therein that she has suffered 50% permanent disability, in future she can not recover fully as injuries sustained by her are permanent, and she can not perform heavy work. 11. AW-3 Dr. A.S. Saifi has issued permanent disability certificate Ex. P/11 in favour of the claimant stating therein that she has suffered 50% permanent disability, in future she can not recover fully as injuries sustained by her are permanent, and she can not perform heavy work. He has further clarified that the percentage of her permanent disability can not be improved in future. 12. While assessing compensation, especially under the Motor Vehicles Act, the Tribunals are statutorily responsible for fixing a compensation which should be just and proper, commensurate with the injury or loss, as the case may be, suffered by the claimants. Although compensation for loss of limbs or life can not be weighed in golden scales, it has to be kept in mind that the compensation is not expected to be a windfall for the victim/claimant. It should be "just" and not a bonanza; not a source of profit, but at the same time, should not be a pittance. There can be no straight jacket formula governing all cases for measuring the value of human life or limbs in terms of money. It would depend upon the particular facts and circumstances, and attending peculiar or special features, if any, of each case. Every method or mode adopted for assessing compensation has to be considered in the background of "just" compensation which is the pivotal consideration. Though a wide discretion is vested in the Tribunal in respect of awarding compensation, but such assessment/determination has to be rational, to be done by a judicious approach and not the outcome of whims, wild guesses and arbitrariness. The expression "just" denotes equitability, fairness and reasonableness, and non-arbitrariness. If it is not so, it can not be just. 13. In the case on hand, the Tribunal without proper appreciation of the pleadings and evidence, in a mechanical manner has awarded a sum of Rs. 2.25 lacs which is shockingly disproportionate to the damage suffered by the claimant. The finding recorded by the Tribunal for awarding such compensation is per se erroneous and perverse. 14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the statements of witnesses, medical certificates (Ex. P/11 & P/111), the claimant has successfully proved that on account of the accident she has suffered 50% permanent disability and severe injuries on her private parts adversely affecting her future prospects and loss of her earning capacity is 100%. 15. 14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the statements of witnesses, medical certificates (Ex. P/11 & P/111), the claimant has successfully proved that on account of the accident she has suffered 50% permanent disability and severe injuries on her private parts adversely affecting her future prospects and loss of her earning capacity is 100%. 15. Undisputedly, the claimant has suffered disability to the extent of 50%, thereby depriving her of reasonable enjoyment in life. She has undergone treatment for a long period and suffered pain and mental agony. It is really difficult to assess the exact amount of compensation for the pain and agony suffered by her. No amount of compensation can restore the physical frame of the claimant. That is why it has been said by the Apex Court in plethora of cases that whenever any amount is determined as compensation payable for any injury suffered during an accident, the object is to compensate such injury so far as money can compensate, because it is impossible to equate the money with the human sufferings and personal deprivations. Money can not renew a broken and shattered physical frame. 16. In the present case, the accident is of the year 2000 when notional income was Rs. 24,000/- p.a. Thus the annual income of the claimant is ascertained as Rs. 24,000/-. As already held above that the loss of earning capacity of the claimant is 100%., since the claimant was unmarried, after deducting 50% towards her personal and living expenses, the annual loss of dependency comes to Rs. 12,000/-. Considering the age of the claimant i.e. 13 years, after applying multiplier of 15 the total loss of dependency comes to Rs. 1,80,000/-. Further, considering the age of the claimant, the nature and extent of the injuries suffered by her, particularly on her private parts, the pain and permanent disability caused thereby as also the loss of enjoyment of amenities of the life which she had to undergo and the fact that her disablement has seriously affected her marital prospects, further expenses is required to be incurred on her future treatment as well as transportation and nutrition, in the opinion of this Court the following compensation would meet the ends of justice and give some solace to the appellant/claimant: 1. For loss of dependency due to 50% Permanent disability and 100% loss of earning capacity Rs. 1,80,000/- 2. For loss of dependency due to 50% Permanent disability and 100% loss of earning capacity Rs. 1,80,000/- 2. For Medical expenses Rs. 1,61,292/- 3. For Pain and sufferings Rs. 75,000/- 4. For attendant Rs. 50,000/- 5. For Nutritional diet Rs. 50,000/- 6. For loss of amenities and marital prospects. Rs. 2,00,000/- 7. For loss of expectation of life Rs. 75,000/- 8. For loss future treatment & transportation. Rs. 50,000/- Total : Rs. 8,41,292/- 17. In view of what has been discussed above, the injured claimant is held entitled for compensation of Rs. 8,41,292/- and since the Tribunal has already awarded Rs. 2.25 lacs, after deducting the same the claimant is entitled for enhancement of Rs. 6,16,292/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization. 18. The insurance company is directed to deposit the entire amount of compensation with the Tribunal within two months from today. 19. The real implementation of this progressive social welfare legislation i.e. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for social security is to ensure that the actual benefits of the award goes to the injured claimant only and the same is not frittered away by the middlemen and other unscrupulous persons intervening sometimes between the victims of the accidents or their legal representatives and the payment machinery. Thus, keeping in view all these things, this Court deems it fit and orders that out of the enhanced amount of compensation i.e. Rs. 6,16,292/- along with interest accrued thereon, the appellant/claimant shall be given only 25% of the same by account payee cheque and the remaining 75% amount shall be kept in fixed deposit in any nationalized bank of the choice of the appellant/claimant in her name for a period of five years. The monthly interest accruing on the amount so deposited shall be credited in the saving account of the appellant/claimant. During the said period, if the appellant wants to withdraw a portion or entire deposited amount for her personal or any other expenses, including development of her asset, then she is at liberty to file application before the Tribunal for release of the deposited amount, who, in turn, after considering the same shall pass appropriate order in this regard. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the award impugned stands modified to the above extent.