1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR. F.A.NO.933 OF 2008 Pratiksha Sureshrao Deshmukh and anr. ..vs.. Kalya @ Rajkumar Babulal and others. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's directions and Registrar's order. orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram : C.L.PANGARKAR, J. Dated : 25th August 2009. 1. Heard Mr.N.R.Saboo, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr.Kalar, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This first appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in an application under Section 166 of the M.V.Act. 3. Appellant Pratiksha was playing on the road when she was given a dash by a Jeep driven by respondent no.1. She suffered injury to her leg and since then she has suffered a 2 permanent disability to the extent of 40%. When the incident took place, age of Pratiksha was five years. 4. After considering the evidence, the learned judge of the Tribunal has awarded the compensation of Rs.1,72,000/-. The appellant feels aggrieved. Mr.Saboo, learned counsel for the appellants, submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is too much inadequate and he should have awarded more compensation considering the fact that the appellant is a girl who has been permanently disabled and the disablement is 40%. He submits that she would face problem at the time of her marriage and therefore, in those circumstances, the learned judge should awarded more compensation. Having considered the age of the appellant at the time of the accident, I do not think that the learned judge has awarded inadequate compensation. He has considered the income of the appellant at Rs.15000/- per year and has applied multiplier of 15. Considering both these facts, I do not think that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is in any way inadequate. There is no substance in the appeal. The same is dismissed. JUDGE. chute