1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ** S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.703/2000 (Km.Swati Vs. Bansi Lal and ors.) Date of Judgment : 02-07-2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GUMAN SINGH Mr.K.N.Tiwari,for the appellants. Mr.Tripurari Sharma, for the respondents. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This appeal has been preferred on behalf of injured-appellant for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Rajasthan State Cooperative Tribunal, Jaipur city, Jaipur vide judgment dated 8.3.2000 whereby a sum of Rs.29,272/- was awarded by way of compensation for 10% disability caused on account of injuries sustained in the accident. 3. The challenge in the appeal pertains to quantum of compensation only. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that injured is a young unmarried lady of 22 years and she sustained as many as three fractures in right hand and at the 2 time of accident she was doing her research work and earning Rs.2000/- by way of tution. It is further submitted that on account of three injuries sustained, she had to undergo two operations and has to attend rehabilitation center for physiotherapy, therefore, compensation deserves to be enhanced by taking second schedule to the M.V.Act to be the guidelines. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supported the judgment of the Tribunal and submitted that the learned Tribunal has taken into consideration evidence adduced during inquiry and has awarded adequate compensation and calls for no interference. It is further submitted that accident relates to year 1992 while second schedule came into force in the year 1994,therefore, it as not applicable and the amount awarded is adequate. 6. After hearing the rival contentions, and going through the award as also record of the case, it is revealed that injured- appellant was doing research work and earning Rs.2000/- per month by way of tution 3 and had to attend rehabilitation center for physiotherapy for four months on account of fractures in the right hand for which she was also operated twice. In view of above facts & circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to calculate the compensation by taking second schedule to be the guidelines though there has been argument of learned counsel for the respondents that accident took place two years before the second schedule came into force but even then the second schedule can be reckoned for the purpose of guidelines and also in view of the fact that the award in the case has been passed in the year 2000. Thus the amount of compensation deserves to be computed by adopting multiplier of 17 commensurating with the percentage of disability and that apart four month's loss of earning to the injured when she was operated and taking physiotherapy, also deserves to be awarded as under: 2000x12=24000x17(multiplier)x10%(disability) =40,800-10000 (already awarded) = 8000 (compensation for four months on account of immobilization)=38,800/- (to be additionally awarded). 4 7. Accordingly, appeal of the injured- appellant is partly allowed and the Award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified to the extent that the injured-appellant shall get a sum of Rs.38,800/- by way of additional enhanced compensation from the date of appeal i.e. 25.5.2000, with 6% interest to be paid within three months. Thereafter interest shall be paid @9% per annum. The rest of the terms of award shall remain unchanged. Record be sent forthwith. (GUMAN SINGH),J. Sandeep/- item no.16