JUDGMENT : JANAK RAJ KOTWAL, J. 1. Appellant, Gulshan Bano, is in appeal against the judgment and award dated 26.02.2010, whereby in the claim application under section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 filed by her, learned Tribunal has awarded her compensation of Rs. 14,25,000/- for the personal injuries sustained by her in a road traffic accident involving the motor vehicle (Tata Sumo) bearing registration No. JK 06-0870 (hereinafter to be referred as the offending vehicle) that occurred on 20.04.2004. Appellant is not satisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. On 20.04.2004 the appellant was travelling by the offending vehicle. At a place called, Choklowa, the driver due to his rash and negligent driving lost control over the vehicle and the vehicle fell into a deep gorge. Appellant suffered serious injuries. The learned Tribunal after inquiry held that the accident had occurred due to negligence of the offending driver. As per the evidence of the Doctor, PW Som K. Chadgal, the appellant, 21 years old girl, suffered compression fracture D2/L2 with paraplegia and thereby hundred per cent disability. The learned Tribunal awarded compensation as per below: 1. For loss of future income Rs. 2,25,000/- 2. For pain and sufferings Rs. 3,00,000/- 3. For loss of amenities in life Rs. 3,00,000/- 4. For medical expenses Rs. 1,00,000/- 5. For Attendant charges Rs. 2,00,000/- 6. For loss of marriage prospects Rs. 2,00,000/- 7. For transportation charges Rs. 1,00,000/- Total Rs. 14,25,000/- 3. The baseline of submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Rajesh Kumar, is that compensation awarded for expenditure on the treatment is much on lesser side, whereas no compensation has been given for future medical expenses. Further that compensation awarded for attendant charges is on lesser side. The learned counsel cited Supreme Court judgment in Kavita v Deepika and others, (2012) 8 SCC 604 . 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-insurance company supported the impugned judgment and award. 5. The authority cited by the appellant's counsel has direct bearing with the case on hand as in that case also, a 30 years old girl had suffered hundred per cent permanent disability. The Supreme Court in that case has broadly summarized the principles for computation of compensation in such cases. Paragraph 18 of the decision is reproduced: "19. 5. The authority cited by the appellant's counsel has direct bearing with the case on hand as in that case also, a 30 years old girl had suffered hundred per cent permanent disability. The Supreme Court in that case has broadly summarized the principles for computation of compensation in such cases. Paragraph 18 of the decision is reproduced: "19. In the light of the principles laid down in the aforementioned cases, it is suffice to say that in determining the quantum of compensation payable to the victims of accident, who are disabled either permanently or temporarily, efforts should always be made to award adequate compensation not only for the physical injury and treatment, but also for the loss of earning and inability to lead a normal life and enjoy amenities, which would have been enjoyed but for the disability caused due to the accident. The amount awarded under the head of loss of earning capacity are distinct and do not overlap with the amount awarded for pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life or the amount awarded for medical expenses." 6. In Kavita's case the Supreme Court inter alia awarded Rs. 7,76,480/- as compensation for medical expenses during pendency of the appeal, Rs. 9,00,000/- for future medical expenses at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month for twenty five years and Rs. 6,00,000/- for attendant charges at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- per month for twenty five years. 7. In the case on hand, nothing has been awarded by the learned Tribunal for future medical expenses, whereas Rs. 2,00,000/- have been awarded for attendant charges. Even for medical expenses the compensation awarded is inadequate and even lower than the amount, which as per evidence was incurred in this behalf by the claimant/appellant. It has been noticed by the learned Tribunal in the evidence that according to the claimant, Rs. 1,50,000/- were incurred on the treatment up to that time and the treatment was going on. 8. In view of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Kavita's case, I find strong merit in this appeal and would hold that the appellant/claimant is entitled to award of compensation for future medical expenses as also increase in compensation for treatment expenses incurred up to this time and that to be incurred hereafter as also the compensation for engagement of attendant, having regard to the disability suffered by her. 9. 9. Viewed thus, this appeal is allowed and additional compensation is awarded as under: Medical expenses incurred till date Rs. 3,00,000/- inclusive of Rs. 1,00,000/- awarded by the learned Tribunal Future Medical Expenses: Rs. 9,00,000/- Attendant Charges: Rs. 6,00,000/- inclusive of Rs. 2,00,000/- awarded by the learned Tribunal. 10. In a nutshell, the compensation of Rs. 14,25,000/- awarded by the learned Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 29,25,000/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at the same rate as awarded by the learned Tribunal from the date of filing of the claim application. Insurance company-respondent No.1 shall deposit the entire award amount along with up-to-date interest in this Court within four weeks hereafter, minus the amount already deposited, if any. Rs. 10,00,000/- in total shall be releases in favour of the appellant/claimant immediately after deposit of the amount whereas rest of the amount shall be kept in fixed deposit in her name initially for a period of ten years. The appellant/claimant shall be entitled to withdraw the interest accrued on the deposited amount. 11. Record of the trial court be remitted back along with a copy of this order. 12. Disposed of accordingly.