JUDGMENT Amitav K. Gupta, J. - This miscellaneous appeal is directed against the award dated 09.10.2015, passed in M.V. Case No.18 of 2011, whereby the learned Principal District Judge-cumP.O. M.A.C.T., Latehar, has awarded compensation including medical expenses along with interest to the claimant, to be paid by the insurance company. 2. Learned counsel, for the appellant, has submitted that the court below has erred in not awarding any amount towards future prospects of the income. It is submitted that the injured - claimant was a carpenter and he had sustained fracture on the rib. That in the medical certificate, i.e., Ext. - 1, it is mentioned that the claimant/injured had sustained 50% disability. In the given circumstances the court below has failed to appreciate that future prospects of the income of the claimant - injured has been affected resulting in loss of income. That the claimant is still under treatment and no amount has been awarded towards loss of future income and the future treatment of the claimant. On the above grounds, it is submitted that the awarded compensation should be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the insurance company, has submitted that though the medical certificate was produced, but the claimant did not examine any medical expert to substantiate the disability of the claimant - injured regarding the nature of 50% permanent disability. The claimant - injured has suffered fracture of ribs and as pleaded he was bed ridden for six months. The Court below has referred and relied upon the decisions reported in 2014 (1) JBCJ 527 (SC) and 2014 (3) JBCJ, 359 (SC), and awarded the compensation taking into account all the aspects. It is contended that the awarded compensation is just and proper. 4. Heard. The provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1998 (''the Act'' for short) makes it clear that the award must be just, which means that compensation should, to the extent possible, fully and adequately restore the claimant to the position prior to the accident. The object of awarding damages is to make the good the loss suffered as a result of wrong done as far as money can do so, in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The object of awarding damages is to make the good the loss suffered as a result of wrong done as far as money can do so, in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The court or the Tribunal shall have to assess the damages objectively and exclude from consideration any speculation of fancy though some conjecture with reference to the nature of disability and its consequences is inevitable. It goes without saying that in matters of determination of compensation both the tribunal and the court are statutorily charged with a responsibility of fixing a just compensation . Needless to say that determination of a just compensation cannot be equated to a bonanza. At the same time the concept of just compensation obviously suggests application of fair and equitable principles and a reasonable approach on the part of the tribunals and courts and this reasonableness on the part of the tribunal and court must be on a large peripheral field, as has been observed in catena of cases by the Apex Court. 5. In the instant case, on perusal of the impugned judgment, it is evident that the court below has considered the general principle that for non-pecuniary damages, the age, nature of injury, deprivation, disability suffered and the effect of future life, is to be taken into account. The medical certificate, Ext. 1, mentions 50 % disability, though it has not been mentioned as to in which portion, limb or part of the body, the claimant/ injured had suffered 50% permanent disability. The court below has appreciated and considered the nature of injury and assessed the loss of income, earning capacity, loss of future prospects during the period of treatment. On examination of the evidence and consideration of all the facts, the Court below has awarded compensation under the following heads: (i) Rs.1,00,000/- (one lakh) in lump-sup amount towards non-pecuniary loss and damages, (ii) Rs.26,221/- (twenty six thousand two hundred and twenty one) towards medical expenses, as per medical vouchers produced, i.e., Ext. - 10 series, (iii) Rs.50,000/- (fifty thousand) towards mental pain, agony, deprivation due to injury, (iv) Rs.25,000/- (twenty five thousand) towards, loss of earning capacity and future prospects. In addition to the aforementioned head of compensation, the court below has also awarded Rs.2,500/- (two thousand five hundred) as litigation cost. - 10 series, (iii) Rs.50,000/- (fifty thousand) towards mental pain, agony, deprivation due to injury, (iv) Rs.25,000/- (twenty five thousand) towards, loss of earning capacity and future prospects. In addition to the aforementioned head of compensation, the court below has also awarded Rs.2,500/- (two thousand five hundred) as litigation cost. The total compensation has been computed at Rs.2,03,721/- (two lakhs three thousand seven hundred and twenty one) with interest @7% per annum. Thus, in the given facts and circumstances, it is held that the award is just and proper and does not merit any interference by this Court. 6. In the result, this appeal is, hereby, dismissed.