JUDGMENT : Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. As both these appeals have arisen out of the same judgment dated 02.5.2009, hence, are being adjudicated by this single judgment. The accident occurred on 25.12.2006 around 3:00 PM when petitioner Km. Rekha, a girl of 12 years, was travelling in a Commander Jeep No. UP07C-4870 in the hilly terrain of District Pauri Garhwal. Such Jeep met with an accident. As a consequence, Km. Rekha suffered serious injuries, which ultimately led her to lose her right leg from above the knee. She presented the MACP No. 7/2007 claiming the compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs, but the learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,37,600/- along with 8 percent annual simple interest from the date of institution of the petition to the date of payment. Feeling aggrieved by this quantum of compensation petitioner-Km. Rekha has presented this appeal no. 277/2009 with a prayer for the enhancement, while Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, the vehicle owner, has presented the appeal no. 210/2009 because the Insurance Company though was asked to satisfy the award, but with a right to recover it from the owner. The premise, which has been highlighted by the learned Tribunal for making the recovery against the vehicle owner, is that he handed over the vehicle in the hand of a driver Shri Vikram Lal, who was not having the endorsement of hill in his licence. That apart, his driving licence was for the light motor vehicle, which was issued w.e.f. 14.12.2006 and valid till 13.12.2009 viz. the driving licence was issued just before ten days of the incident. These eventualities have been discussed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in a number of judgments and out of them the Constitutional Bench of the Hon’ble Court in case of National Insurance Company vs. Swaran Singh and Others reported in 2004 3 SCC 297 has dealt with such type of cases. The Hon’ble Apex Court has drawn the distinction of Section 149 (a) (ii) which envisaged “Duly licensed” and Section 3 of the Motor Vehicle Act, which contemplates the effective licence. It was held out as under:- “Under the Act holding of a valid driving licence is one of the conditions of the contract of insurance. Driving of a vehicle without a valid licence is an offence. It was held out as under:- “Under the Act holding of a valid driving licence is one of the conditions of the contract of insurance. Driving of a vehicle without a valid licence is an offence. Whereas in Section 3 the words used are “effective licence”, it has been differently worded in Section 149(2) i.e. “duly licensed”. If a person does not hold an effective licence as on the date of the accident, he may be liable for prosecution in terms of Section 141 of the Act but Section 149 pertains to insurance as regards third-party risks. A provision of a statue which is penal in nature vis-à-vis a provision which is beneficent to a third party must be interpreted differently. It is also well known that the expressions contained in different provisions are ordinarily construed differently. The words “effective licence” used in Section 3, therefore cannot be imported into Section 149(2) of the Act. Moreover, the words “duly licensed” used in Section 149(2) are used in the past tense.” So, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, I am of the opinion that the driving licence of the offending vehicle was quite valid and simply for the reason that it was not endorsed for hills could not be a basis for shifting the liability upon the owner-cum-driver. In the result, I feel that Insurance Company should owe the liability to satisfy the award. This way the Appeal No. 210/2009 deserves its acceptance. Since, Km. Rekha, a budding girl, suffered so much serious injuries, inasmuch as, lost her right leg from above the knee, so it is difficult to measure her agony for rest of the life which she is constrained to live without a leg. In such eventuality, there is no calculated equations for granting the compensation, but, I think that the Court should feel the anguish and the helplessness, which this young lady is constrained to suffer for the whole life, which at times may be measured to be the worse than the losing of the whole human life. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I enhance the compensation to the tune of Rs. 5 (five) lakhs along with 8 percent interest from the date of institution of the petition up to the date of the payment. The Insurance Company shall be liable to pay this difference. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I enhance the compensation to the tune of Rs. 5 (five) lakhs along with 8 percent interest from the date of institution of the petition up to the date of the payment. The Insurance Company shall be liable to pay this difference. The amount so deposited by Mr. Raj Kumar Sharma shall be returned to him with interest which it has earned during the course of such deposit. The amount given by the Insurer shall be adjusted.