1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 4882/2008 {Shri Amar Singh Versus Mahendra Singh & Others} Date of Order :: 5th December, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN Mr. L.M. Bhardwaj for the appellant BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The injured-appellant has preferred this appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation in respect of injuries sustained by him in motor accident took place on 8th October, 2002 and being aggrieved with the impugned award dated 25th August, 2005 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bandikui, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded the total amount of compensation in his favour as Rs. 1,65,760/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of claim application i.e. 13th November, 2002. 3. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the amount of compensation awarded in the present case cannot 2 be said to be an adequate amount of compensation looking to number and nature of injury and percentage of permanent disability. He further submits that no amount of compensation has been awarded under the head of physical pain and mental agony. He, therefore, contended that amount of compensation is liable to be enhanced. 4. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and examined the impugned award particularly the finding of the learned Tribunal in respect of issue no.3 relating to quantum of compensation. As per injury report, the appellant sustained two injuries and as per X-ray report, one injury was found to be grievous. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,000/- for simple injury and Rs. 5,000/- for grievous injury, total amount of Rs. 6,000/- towards it. The appellant suffered 23.89% permanent disability. As per permanent disability certificate, under the 'head of loss of income', the Tribunal calculated the compensation by determining his monthly income as Rs. 3,000/- in absence of any documentary evidence in respect of his monthly income and looking to his age in between 35 to 40 years, applied the multiplier of 16 and calculated the 3 total amount of Rs. 5,76,000/-, which was divided by 24 i.e. 23.89% permanent disability and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,38,240/- towards loss of income. The Tribunal has further awarded a sum of Rs. 9,000/- for loss of three months' income, during which he remained under treatment, thus, awarded total compensation of Rs. 1,65,760/- for one simple injury, one grievous injury and 23.89% permanent disability. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Divisional Controller, KSRTC Versus Mahadeva Shetty and Another {(2003) 7 Supreme Court Cases 197} has held that Tribunal is required to pass an award under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which appears to be just and reasonable. Every mode or method adopted for assessing the compensation has to be considered in the background of “just” compensation, which is the pivotal consideration. It is also held that amount of compensation should neither be a meager amount nor it should be a bonanza. 6. After considering the number and nature of the injuries and the percentage of permanent disability suffered by the appellant, I am of the view that amount of compensation awarded in the present case cannot be said to be inadequate, as contended by learned counsel 4 for the appellant. The amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just, fair and reasonable and no interference in it is called for. 7. In view of above discussion, I do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed in limine. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J. DK