HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.M.A.No. 1659 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: This Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is directed against the order dated 20.01.2004 passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, L.B. Nagar (for short ‘the Court below’) in OP No. 125 of 1996 filed by the appellant- claimant claiming compensation of Rs. 75,000/- for the injuries sustained by her in a motor accident when she and her father loaded the lorry ABT 22733 with flowers and coming from Goel Grape Garden to Hyderabad, and when the lorry reached near Kandlakoya Villge, the driver of the lorry drove the same in a rash and negligent manner at high speed and dashed against a tree and as a result of which, the claimant received fracture to both legs and rods were inserted and she spent Rs. 10,000/- for medical expenses and she suffered permanent disability. Respondents 1 being owner of the lorry and the second respondent, being insurer filed its counter denying the averments made in the petition. 2. The Tribunal having held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry bearing No. ABT 22733, and taking into consideration the evidence of PW 3 doctor who issued Ex. A-8 disability certificate assessing the disability at 50% awarded a compensation of Rs. 60,000/- with interest at 9% per annum Aggrieved by the same, the claimant filed the present appeal. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant contended that the Tribunal ought to have granted the entire claim amount and it failed to appreciate the evidence on record and it failed to consider the permanent disability to the extent of 50% physical disability due to which it is very difficult for her to do the labour work, as such, future loss of income is effected to the extent of 100%. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the claimant and also perused the entire material made available on record. 5. As seen from the record, it is no doubt true that due to rash and negligent driving of the Lorry bearing No. ABT 22733 by its driver, accident occurred and due to which, the claimant sustained fracture to both legs. The claimant was hale and healthy prior to the accident and she used to earn Rs. 35/- per day. Due to injuries, the claimant suffered permanent disability. As far as the claim of compensation is concerned, in the absence of documentary evidence with regard to earnings, taken the notional income of Rs. 15,000/- as per II Schedule of Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act and after deducing the disability of 50%, the amount comes to Rs. 7,500/- and the claimant is aged about only 13 years the age of the father viz., 40 years has to be taken for calculating the compensation as per the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in SARALA VERMA VS. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTEHR[1], if calculated the net amount comes to Rs. 1,12,500/- (7,500x15=1,12,500). 6. The Supreme Court in HARDEO KAUR VS. RAJASTHAN STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION[2] held that the determination of compensation in respect of injury cases must be liberal. The relevant portion of the same reads as under: “the determination of compensation in respect of injury cases must be liberal and the amount of compensation so awarded should not be niggardly and at the same not a wind fall as a profit making venture through the Tribunals or Courts. When the compensation is awarded by the Courts and Tribunals even the tort feasor should feel that he is atoned for the sin committed by him in committing the accident robbing the precious life of a human being and injuring the innocent person for no fault of his and the guidelines from such precedents is only to emphasise that if there are two precedents dealing with the same question of assessing the compensation, the one which has adopted a liberal approach should be preferred than the one which has adopted the conservative approach.” 7. In view of the above judgment of the Supreme Court and also taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, an amount of Rs. 10,000/- is granted towards pain and suffering and Rs. 5,000/- is granted towards loss of amenities totaling to Rs. 1,27,500/- (1,12,500 + 10,000 + 5,000= 1,27,500/-). 8. Accordingly, this appeal filed by the claimant is allowed in part enhancing the compensation granted by the Court below from 60,000/- to Rs. 1,27,500/-. As far as the interest is concerned, the rate of interest granted by the Tribunal at 9% per annum is reduced to 7% per annum. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date: 12.11.2010 KA [1] 2009 (6) SCALE 129 [2] AIR 1992 SC 1261