{ 1 } IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR J U D G M E N T S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1010/2009 SMT. PUSHPA SHARMA VS. SHAKTI SHARMA & ORS. Date of order : 25.8.2010 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SAPRE Mr. N.S. Khileri, for the appellant. Mr. Anil Kaushik, for the respondents. BY THE COURT: Claimant is in appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award, dated 19.11.2008, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Deedwana in Claim Case No.40/06. By impugned award, the learned Member of Claims Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.42,950/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization for the injuries sustained by the claimant. According to claimant, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side and hence, need to be enhanced so as to make it reasonable, adequate, proper and in conformity with the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act. It is essentially for these reliefs, the claimant has filed this appeal claiming enhancement in the compensation. So the short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether any case for { 2 } enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is made out on the two grounds and if so, to what extent? 2. In view of short controversy involved in the appeal, it is really not necessary to take note of the facts in detail except those which are necessary. It is also for the reason that findings in relation to nature of accident, how it occurred, who was responsible for causing injury, liability, etc. are decided in favour of claimant by the Tribunal. In the absence of any challenge to these findings by the respondents, by not filing any cross appeal or cross objection, these findings have become final. 3. This is a case of injury suffered by claimant – Smt. Pushpa Sharma, aged 30 years, by profession Nurse, who was coming with her husband in Car bearing No.RJ- 14/4C-9578 from Bhilwara to Deedwana, dashed by a Truck bearing No.HR-47/9859 on 7.12.2004. The Truck was owned by respondent No.2, driven by respondent No.1 and insured with respondent No.3. According to claimant, she suffered injuries due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle in question i.e. Truck and hence all the non-applicants are liable to pay compensation jointly and severally. According to claimant she was 30 years and suffered grievous injury in her right eye, fractures of two ribs in right side as well as many other simple and grievous injuries on her body. The Claims Tribunal on appreciating the entire evidence adduced by the claimant awarded a total compensation of Rs.42,950/- towards the injuries sustained by her, expenses incurred, disability occurred and lastly pain and suffering. It is this determination, which is impugned by the claimant, being on lower side hence, this appeal for enhancement. { 3 } 4. Heard Shri N.S.Khileri, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Anil Kaushik, learned counsel for respondents. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused record of the case, I am inclined to allow the appeal in part. 6. I have gone through the evidence adduced by the claimant on the issue of injury sustained by her. In my opinion, taking into consideration the nature of injuries i.e. grievous injury in her right eye, fractures of two ribs in right side as well as many other simple and grievous injuries on her body as a result of which she became partially disabled, the expenditure incurred in receiving medical treatment in actual and to be incurred in future, the loss and mental pain / suffering suffered due to her involvement in accident and disability occurred, I consider it proper to enhance in lump sum the compensation from Rs.42,950/- to Rs.75,000/- . In other words, in my view, the claimant is held entitled for a total sum of Rs.75,000/- by way of compensation for the injuries sustained by her. 7. The compensation awarded to the claimant, who is aged 30 years is a just, reasonable and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the law laid down by the Supreme Court in these types of cases in relation to several heads taken note of supra with reference to evidence brought on record by the parties. Indeed in such cases, no fixed and any static formula as such is provided for determining the compensation and the same is required to be determined on the basis of totality of evidence adduced and the relevant factors which are required to be taken into { 4 } consideration as mentioned supra. It is on this basis, the courts have to work out award of reasonable compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant cited some authorities for claiming enhancement. I have gone through these authorities. In my opinion and as observed supra, every case depends upon facts of each case and one can rely upon the cases for awarding compensation. Indeed taking into consideration these authorities and then applying the law so laid down to the facts of this case, I have arrived at the figure of enhanced compensation mentioned supra. 9. In this view of the matter, the appeal succeeds and is allowed in part. Impugned award is modified to the extent indicated above. The awarded sum mentioned in para 6 will carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of application till realization. All other findings are upheld being not under challenge. Counsel fees Rs.500/-, if certified. (A.M.SAPRE ),J. /Anil/