S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 679/2001 (Pankaj @ Pawan Versus Bhagwan Das & Others) Date of Order :: 10th February, 2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. K.N. Tiwari, counsel for the appellant. Mr. N.S. Yadav, counsel for the respondents The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 8th March, 2001 rendered by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur for enhancement of the quantum of compensation. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record including the impugned judgment passed by the learned Tribunal. 3. Having reflected over the submissions made at the bar and carefully scanned the relevant material on record, it is noticed that the appellant Pankaj @ Pawan, a small child of 7 years of age, sustained one grievous injury and four simple injuries on his person in an accident, which is alleged to have taken place on 30th December, 1994 at 5.15 PM on Ajmer by-pass situated at Jaipur. The -2- learned Tribunal having considered all the aspects of the matter, awarded Rs. 9000/- for injuries, Rs. 10,000/- for 10% partial disability; Rs. 10,000/- towards suffering from pain and trauma; and Rs. 15325/- towards the medical bills. Apart this, the learned Tribunal also awarded Rs. 10,000/- towards conveyance and nutritious food. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant canvassed that keeping in view the age of the child, the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal seems to be abysmally low, which needs to be enhanced. 5. E Contra the learned counsel for the Insurance Company defended the impugned judgment and stated the same to be just and proper. 6. Keeping in view the manner in which the accident took place and the injuries sustained by the appellant, I am of the opinion that the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper and the said amount cannot be said to be abysmally low from any stretch of imagination. The -3- learned Tribunal discussed the arguments advanced by both the parties at length and appreciated the evidence emerging on record in the right perspective. The impugned judgment is based on cogent reasoning and the same does not warrant any intervention. 7. For the reasons stated above, the appeal fails and being bereft of any merit, stands dismissed. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. DK/-