JUDGMENT : 1. This appeal is filed under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and Additional M.A.C.T. at Chitradurga (hereinafter referred to as ‘The Tribunal’ for short), by its judgment and award dated 23.06.2009 in MVC No. 819/2007. 2. The appellant/claimant in her memorandum of appeal has taken a contention that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various heads are all meager. Further stating that the Tribunal ought to have awarded the compensation as claimed by her, has prayed for allowing the appeal. 3. Heard the arguments from both sides and perused the materials placed before this court. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant in his argument submitted that an young girl of four years old has sustained two major fractured injuries, both bones of right leg were fractured. As such, the quantum of compensation awarded towards pain and suffering was on the lower side. He further submitted that the compensation awarded towards loss of amenities is also on the lower side. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent Insurance Company in his argument submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reasonable and does not warrant any interference at the hands of this Court. 6. The present appeal being the claimant’s appeal and the respondents having not preferred either cross-objection or a counter appeal, the question of occurrence of accident on the date, time and place as alleged by the claimant and also the alleged rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle is not in dispute. Therefore, the question of occurrence of accident and the alleged liability of the respondents to pay compensation to the injured claimant for the injuries sustained by her in the accident need not be re-analysed again. The only question that remains to be considered is about the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 7. After analyzing the evidence and the materials placed before it, the Tribunal has awarded the compensation under the following heads with the sum shown against them:- Towards pain and suffering Rs. 20,000 Towards medical expenses, food, conveyance and attendant charges Rs. 20,000 Towards loss of amenities and future inconvenience Rs. 10,000 Total Rs. 50,000 8. 7. After analyzing the evidence and the materials placed before it, the Tribunal has awarded the compensation under the following heads with the sum shown against them:- Towards pain and suffering Rs. 20,000 Towards medical expenses, food, conveyance and attendant charges Rs. 20,000 Towards loss of amenities and future inconvenience Rs. 10,000 Total Rs. 50,000 8. PW-1 who is the father-cum-guardian of the injured girl in his evidence has stated that in the accident in question his daughter sustained fracture of both bones of her right leg. The wound certificate at Ex.P3, a copy of which has been produced before the Court by the appellant, go to show that in the accident the claimant sustained fracture of tibia and fibula of her right leg. She was surgically operated by the Doctor and was an inpatient in the Hospital for not les than three days. The said medical document would show that the claimant has sustained fracture of both bones of her right lower limb and being a young girl she must have suffered considerable pain also to bear with the injury. Considering these aspects, I am of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal for pain and suffering deserves to be enhanced by an additional sum of Rs. 10,000/-. 9. The exhibits from P6 to P33, which are being medical prescriptions and bills go to show that towards the treatment of the injured claimant an expense of Rs. 15,494/- was incurred. The Tribunal, even after considering the same, has awarded a sum of Rs. 20,000/- which includes not only medical expenses but also food and nourishment charges, conveyance, attendant charges, etc. Considering the nature of injury and for the loss of energy and strength, the injured girl had taken the food, food and nourishment expenses also would be of considerable quantum, so also conveyance. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the said head deserves an enhancement by Rs. 15,000/- to bring it to a reasonable sum. 10. Even though PW-1 has stated that due to the injury his daughter is unable to participate in the sports and could not able to continue her education as earlier, but there is no corroborative evidence to support the said statement of PW-1. However, it is revealed that the girl has continued her education unabatedly. 10. Even though PW-1 has stated that due to the injury his daughter is unable to participate in the sports and could not able to continue her education as earlier, but there is no corroborative evidence to support the said statement of PW-1. However, it is revealed that the girl has continued her education unabatedly. Considering these aspects, the Tribunal arrived at a conclusion that the injured must have lost future inconvenience and loss of amenities, and has awarded a compensation in a sum of Rs. 10,000/-. Considering the age of the injured and the fact that during the remaining lifespan, she might be deprived of some percentage of amenities in life. I am of the view that the said compensation deserves to be enhanced by a sum of Rs. 15,000/- to bring it to a reasonable amount. 11. Barring the above, the claimant/appellant is not entitled for enhancement of compensation or awarding of compensation under any other heads. 12. Thus, in total the claimant/appellant is entitled for a total enhancement of a sum of Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only), which is in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 13. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER: The appeal is allowed in part. 14. The judgment and award passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and Additional M.A.C.T. at Chitradurga in MVC No. 819/2017 dated 23.06.2009 is modified to the extent that the compensation awarded at Rs. 50,000/- is enhanced by a sum of Rs. 40,000/- thus fixing the total compensation at Rs. 90,000/- (Rupees Ninety Thousand only). 15. The rest of the order of the Tribunal with respect to fixing the liability upon the respondents and the terms regarding deposit of the awarded amount, awarding the interest, its rate, terms regarding release of the amount awarded, shall remain unaltered. 16. However, since the delay of 183 days in filing this appeal was condoned subject to denial of the interest on the enhanced amount for the said period, the claimant is not entitled for the interest on the enhanced amount for the said period. 17. Draw modified award accordingly.