HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A.No.1697 of 2005 JUDGMENT The appellant, who is a minor represented by his natural father, filed O.P.No.1352 of 2001 claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-for the injuries sustained by her in a road accident occurred on 04.12.2000 at about 4.30 PM, while travelling along with her parents in a Tractor and Trailer due to rash and negligent driving of its driver. R1 and R3 are the owners and R2 and R4 are the insurers of the said tractor and trailer. R2 and R4 filed counter denying the averments made in the claim petition. The Tribunal, after considering all the material on record, awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-to the claimant vide order impugned, dated 30.11.2004. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the appellant filed the present appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4-insurers. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that though the claimant sustained 50% permanent disability as per Ex.A10- Disability Certificate, the Tribunal failed to consider the same and granted less compensation to the claimant. 4. The appellant was aged 5 years by the time of accident. The order impugned shows that she suffered fracture of shaft of 3rd, 4th meta tarsals of left foot and fracture shaft of 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th meta tarsals of right foot as per Ex.A4-wound certificate. Ex.A10-disability certificate shows that she sustained 50% permanent disability, but the Doctor, who treated her and who issued the said certificate, was not examined. As such, the Tribunal considering the nature of injuries held that the claimant sustained 25% permanent disability and awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-as claimed by her. 5. The accident occurred in 2000 and at that time, the age of the claimant is five years. As 10 years elapsed from the date of accident, the injuries sustained by the claimant might have been cured at this point of time. Further, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-towards compensation to the claimant. In those circumstances, this Court is of the view that the Tribunal awarded just and reasonable compensation and there is no need to interfere with by this Court in the order impugned. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date:17.02.2011 sj