ORDER : This appeal by the appellant/claimant under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is arising out of the award dated 17.08.2010 passed by Ninth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Fast Track), Gwalior (M.P) (hereinafter it would be referred to as ''the Claims Tribunal'') in Claims Case No.17/2009 on account of inadequacy of compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation. (2) The date of accident, negligence and the issue of liability are not in dispute and the findings recorded by the Claims Tribunal in this regard are not in question. (3) As per findings of the Tribunal, in the case of injury of the claimant- Ku. Asha (herein appellant), an amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.33,000/- has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal with interest @ 6% per annum from filing of claim petition till its realization. (4) Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submitted that Claims Tribunal has committed grave error in awarding the amount of compensation. He further submits that Claims Tribunal has awarded the compensation in lower side, hence, prayed that compensation amount be enhanced on the following grounds:- (a) The appellant has become a crippled person and her future has become dark due to injuries suffered by her in the alleged accident. She has also become ineligible for getting any employment while also making her marriage prospects is totally diminished. (b) The appellant has also been hospitalized for a long time and has spent huge amount of money on her treatment including travelling, medicines, special diet expenses etc. (c) The appellant has not been granted any compensation for gracious service rendered by her family members. (d) The appellant cannot run, squat or walk due to alleged accident and has lost all amenities of her life and also suffered a lot of pains and sufferings. (e) The Claims Tribunal awarded a meagre amount of Rs 33,000/-on account of loss of future income, which is minimal and incorrect. The amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal is on the lower side. (5) On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent/Insurance Company supported the impugned award and prayed for rejection of the appeal. (6) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of Claims Tribunal. The amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal is on the lower side. (5) On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent/Insurance Company supported the impugned award and prayed for rejection of the appeal. (6) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of Claims Tribunal. (7) So far as the question regarding grant of just and fair compensation to the victim/injured in Motor Accident Claim Case is concerned, the following legal analysis is read as under:- While it is very difficult to make an accurate assessment of the compensation to be awarded to the motor accident victim as the loss is not confined to the pecuniary value, however, the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has provided a protection to the victim against an inadequate compensation. For reference, the Section 168 of the Act is reproduced as under: 168. Award of the Claims Tribunal.-- "(1)On receipt of an application for compensation made under section 166, the Claims Tribunal shall, after giving notice of the application to the insurer and after giving the parties (including the insurer) an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry into the claim or, as the case may be, each of the claims and, subject to the provisions of section 162 may make an award determining the amount of compensation which appears to it to be just and specifying the person or persons to whom compensation shall be paid and in making the award the Claims Tribunal shall specify the amount which shall be paid by the insurer or owner or driver of the vehicle involved in the accident or by all or any of them, as the case may be: Provided that where such application makes a claim for compensation under section 140 in respect of the death or permanent disablement of any person, such claim and any other claim (whether made in such application or otherwise) for compensation in respect of such death or permanent disablement shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Chapter X........" (8) From perusal of aforesaid Section, it is evident that just compensation has to be determined based on the foundations of fairness, reasonableness and equitability on acceptable legal standards. The courts have time and again been emphatic about the endeavor to award just and fair compensation in motor accident claims. The courts have time and again been emphatic about the endeavor to award just and fair compensation in motor accident claims. (9) The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma & Ors vs. Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr (2009) 6 SCC 121 , has held as under:- "Just compensation is adequate compensation which is fair and equitable, on the facts and circumstances of the case, to make good the loss suffered as a result of the wrong, as far as money can do so, by applying the well settled principles relating to award of compensation. It is not intended to be a bonanza, largesse or source of profit. Assessment of compensation though involving certain hypothetical considerations should nevertheless be objective. Justice and justness emanate from equality in treatment, consistency and thoroughness in adjudication, and fairness and uniformity in the decision making process and the decisions. While it may not be possible to have mathematical precision or identical awards, in assessing compensation, same or similar facts should lead to awards in the same range. When the factors/inputs are the same, and the formula/legal principles are the same, consistency and uniformity, and not divergence and freakiness, should be the result of adjudication to arrive at just compensation." (10). Furthermore, the aforesaid judgment regarding just and proper compensation amount to the victim is duly followed by the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Smt. Anjali & Ors Vs. Lokendra Rathod & Ors 2022 SCC Online SC 1683, wherein it has been held as under:- "Motor Vehicles Act, 1988; Section 168 - Concept of "just compensation" which ought to be determined on the foundation of fairness, reasonableness and equitability - Although such determination can never be arithmetically exact or perfect, an endeavor should be made by the Court to award just and fair compensation irrespective of the amount claimed by the applicant/s."(para 10) (11). The Hon'ble Supreme Court while assessing the reasonable compensation amount in accident case in the matter of Yadava Kumar Vs. Divisional Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2010) 10 SCC 341 , has observed as under:- "14. While assessing compensation in accident cases, the High Court or the Tribunal must take a reasonably compassionate view of things. It cannot be disputed that the appellant being a painter has to earn his livelihood by virtue of physical work. Divisional Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2010) 10 SCC 341 , has observed as under:- "14. While assessing compensation in accident cases, the High Court or the Tribunal must take a reasonably compassionate view of things. It cannot be disputed that the appellant being a painter has to earn his livelihood by virtue of physical work. The nature of injuries which he admittedly suffered, and about which the evidence of PW- 2 is quite adequate, amply demonstrates that carrying those injuries he is bound to suffer loss of earning capacity as a painter and a consequential loss of income is the natural outcome. 15. 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." (12) The following factors are necessary to be taken into consideration while granting compensation in favour of the claimant/victim for an accident claim case. Life and human faculties are beyond monetary valuation. It is impossible for anyone to assign a financial worth to a limb or a human being. When an accident leaves a person in a vegetative state, evaluating the loss of all faculties becomes a daunting task. Courts can only provide compensation for pecuniary losses and related expenses, but quantifying the loss of life or limb is an insurmountable challenge. In its very nature whenever a Tribunal or a Court is required to fix the amount of compensation in cases of accident, it involves some guess work, some hypothetical consideration, some amount of sympathy linked with the nature of the disability caused. (13) In view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforecited cases as well as the above factors which are necessary to be taken into consideration while awarding the compensation for an accident claim, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Claims Tribunal shall have to bear in mind the future prospects of the victim affected by the accident as well in addition the other factors like pain, agony caused due to accident, the medical expenses, the marriage prospects etc. In this regard, the following relevant factors are to be taken into consideration while awarding compensation in favour of the victim/claimant as the same are explained by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jagdish vs. Mohan and others reported in (2018) 4 SCC 571 in Para 8 as under:- "8. In assessing the compensation payable the settled principles need to be borne in mind. A victim who suffers a permanent or temporary disability occasioned by an accident is entitled to the award of compensation. The award of compensation must cover among others, the following aspects: (i) Pain, suffering and trauma resulting from the accident; (ii) Loss of income including future income; (iii) The inability of the victim to lead a normal life together with its amenities; (iv) Medical expenses including those that the victim may be required to undertake in future; and (v) Loss of expectation of life." (14). Reliance can be placed in the case of Govind Yadav v. New India Insurance Company Limited, (2011) 10 SCC 683 , Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Company Limited and Another, (2010) 10 SCC 254 , and Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar and Another, (2011) 1 SCC 343 , wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically held that adequate compensation ought to be awarded not only for the physical injury and treatment, but also for the loss of earning and his inability to lead a normal life and enjoy amenities, which he would have enjoyed but for the disability caused due to the accident. The same view has been fortified by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of K. Suresh v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. reported in (2012) 12 SCC 274 , wherein it has been held as under: "10. It is noteworthy to state that an adjudicating authority, while determining the quantum of compensation, has to keep in view the sufferings of the injured person which would include his inability to lead a full life, his incapacity to enjoy the normal amenities which he would have enjoyed but for the injuries and his ability to earn as much as he used to earn or could have earned. Hence, while computing compensation the approach of the Tribunal or a court has to be broad-based. Hence, while computing compensation the approach of the Tribunal or a court has to be broad-based. Needless to say, it would involve some guesswork as there cannot be any mathematical exactitude or a precise formula to determine the quantum of compensation. In determination of compensation the fundamental criterion of "just compensation" should be inhered." (15) The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that due to the alleged accident the appellant/claimant is suffering from foot drop disease and submits that the cause of foot drop diseased due to alleged accident is as under:- "Foot drop which was also called drop foot happens when you can't raise the front part of your foot due to weakness or paralysis of the muscles that lift it. It's a symptom of several possible underlying conditions and can be temporary or long-term (chronic). Due to weakness or paralysis, people who have foot drop often drag their toes when they walk. They may also have to lift their knee higher than usual to avoid dragging their toes. Walking this way may increase your risk of tripping and falling. Foot drop can affect one of your feet (unilateral) or both of them (bilateral)." (16) In the present case, although learned Claims Tribunal has awarded only to the tune of Rs.33,000/- in favour of the claimant considering the oral as well as medical evidence produced by claimant vide Ex.P-20 and Ex.P-21, but it is clear from the record that deceased is suffering from foot drop disease due to the alleged accident. (17) So considering the evidence of Dr.Pukhraj Gaur (AW-3) and documents available on record, it is clear that claimant whose age is just eight years at the time of accident suffering from foot drop disease. Thus, it is clear that claimant has not only lost his childhood due to alleged accident but her adult life and also lost her marriage prospects. The Claims Tribunal has not granted any compensation for gratuitous service rendered by her family members. In motor accident claim case, the main elements/factors for loss of life of child victim are pain, shock, frustration, deprivation of the ordinary pleasures and enjoyment associated with healthy and mobile limbs. The compensation awarded should enable the child to acquire something or to develop a lifestyle which will offset, to some extent, the inconvenience or discomfort arising out of the disability. The compensation awarded should enable the child to acquire something or to develop a lifestyle which will offset, to some extent, the inconvenience or discomfort arising out of the disability. So, in the considered opinion of this Court, it would be appropriate to enhance lump sum amount of Rs.2,50,000/-along with interest. In view of the above, present appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated herein above. The amount of compensation is enhanced to lump sum amount of Rs.2,50,000/- in the present appeal. The appellant/claimant is entitled to receive Rs.2,50,000/- in addition to the amount already awarded by the Claims tribunal. The enhanced amount shall carry interest as awarded by the tribunal from the date of the filing of the claim petition till its realization. All other findings recorded by the tribunal shall remain intact. The present appeal stands disposed of.