IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDIC.ATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1689/99 (Sanjay Joshi V/s. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.) Date of Judgment :: 13-5-08 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.S. CHAUHAN Mr. Sandeep Mathur for the appellant. Mr. B.C. Rawat for the respondent No.3. Having suffered sixteen percent disability, having granted a compensation amounting to Rs.53,000/- alongwith interest @ 12%, the appellant has still challenged the award dated 08.09.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur ('the learned Tribunal', for short). In a nutshell, the facts of the case are that on 15.10.1995, around 10:15 AM, the appellant was riding on his scooter. Because of the redlight, in front of the Mahila Hospital, the appellant stopped his scooter behind a roadways bus and waited for the light to turn green. While he was waiting, a mini-bus, bearing registration No.RJ-26- P-0046, being driven in rash and negligent manner, came and hit the scooter from behind. Because of the impact, the scooter was pushed into the roadways bus. Because of the said accident, the appellant suffered injuries in his jaw, left hand, teeth and in his left femur bone. Consequently, he was hospitalized from 15.10.1995 to 13.11.1995. Subsequently, the appellant filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal. In order to substantiate his case, the appellant examined two witnesses and submitted fifteen documents. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Tribunal granted the compensation, as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. Mr. Sandeep Mathur, the learned counsel for the appellant, has vehemently argued that the compensation amount is too meagre. For, it does not include the compensation which should have been paid for non-pecuniary loss suffered by the appellant. He has also contended that Item No.5 of the Second Schedule attached to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act', for short) provides a particular formula for assessing the compensation in case of partial disablement. However, the said formula has not been applied while calculating the compensation. According to the learned counsel, the appellant was earning Rs.2,100/- per month at the time of accident. At the time of accident, the appellant was twenty-six years old. While applying the formula given in Item NO.5 of the Second Schedule, the compensation should be enhanced. On the other hand, Mr. B.C. Rawat, the learned counsel for the respondent No.3, the Insurance Company, has supported the impugned award and has argued that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is "just and reasonable" in the facts and circumstances of the case. We have heard both the learned counsels, have perused the impugned award and have examined the record of the case. No amount of monetary compensation can ever restore an injured body to its pristine condition. The purpose of paying the compensation is merely to mitigate the suffering undergone by the claimant and to compensate him by way of monetary terms for such a suffering. In catena of cases, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that compensation is not a bonanza to be granted to the claimants. But, the compensation must be "just and reasonable" after considering the facts and circumstances of each case. The justness and reasonableness of a compensation would, naturally, depend upon the provisions of law. Item No.5 of the Second Schedule attached to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is as under :- "5. Disability in non-fatal accidents : The following compensation shall be payable in case of disability of the victim arising on of non-fatal accidents : Loss of income, if any, for actual period of disablement not exceeding fifty two weeks. PLU either of the following :- (a) In case of permanent total disablement the amount payable shall be arrived at by multiplying the annual loss of income by the Multiplier applicable to the age on the date of determining the compensation, or (b) In case of permanent partial disablement such percentage of compensation which would have been payable in the case of permanent total disablement as specified under item (a) above. Injuries deemed to result in Permanent Total Disablement /Permanent Partial Disablement and percentage of loss of earning capacity shall be as per Schedule I under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923." Since the present case is one of partial disablement, obviously the said formula is applicable. However, the learned Tribunal has ignored the said formula without assigning any reason. Once a formula has been stipulated in the Second Schedule, the learned Tribunal should have applied the said formula. In case, the learned Tribunal wanted to deviate from the formula, it should have indicated the reasons for such a deviation. However, in the present case, the learned Tribunal has not given any cogent reasons for not following the said formula. Repeatedly, in catena of cases namely, S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal Nos. 1538/05 (Parmanand Sharma V/s. Shri Mohd. Aslam Khan & Ors., decided on 17.04.2007), S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 617/1995 reported in 2006 R.A.R. 176 (Raj.), S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.3544/05 (Kailash Chand Gupta V/s. Ram Vilas & Anr., decided on 14.03.2008) and S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1036/04 (Dharmendra Kumar V/s. Purushottam Lal & Ors., decided on 27.04.2007), this Court has implemented the Item No.5 and has calculated the compensation accordingly. Therefore, this Court has no hesitation in calculating the compensation by following the said formula: Rs.2100/- X 18 X 12 =Rs.4,53,600/-.Sixteen percent of Rs.4,53,600/- is equal to Rs.72,576/-. Therefore, the award dated 08.09.1999 passed by the learned Tribunal is modified as under : (a) The compensation should be calculated as Rs.2100/-X18X12X=Rs.4,53,600/-. Sixteen percent of Rs.4,53,600/- is equal to Rs.72,576/-. (b) The Insurance Company is directed to pay the enhanced compensation amount of Rs.72,576/- after deducting the amount already disbursed to the appellant. It is, further, directed to pay remaining enhanced amount alongwith interest of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e., 05.01.1996 till the date of realization. (c) The learned tribunal is directed to ensure that the appellant is granted the enhanced compensation amount alongwith interest within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. (R.S. CHAUHAN),J A.Asopa/-