The court emphasized the need to consider the impact of permanent disability on the claimant's life and enhanced the compensation under non-pecuniary heads accordingly.

JUDGMENT

Rekha Palli, J. (Oral)--The present appeal preferred by the claimant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeks to assail the award dated 11.02.2019 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal in Claim Petition No.76696/2016, insofar as it relates to the quantum of compensation. Vide the impugned award the learned Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.26,09,302/- alongwith interest @9% p.a., including an amount of Rs.75,000/- towards "Pain and suffering, Rs.50,000/- towards `Loss of amenities of life' and Rs.1,00,000/- towards `Loss of marriage prospects".

2. The appellant, namely Meenu, is a young lady aged about 28 years, who, at about 9 am on 08.02.2016, while crossing the road near Baba Haridas X-ray Clinic, Nangloi Chowk was hit with a Tata Tempo bearing Registration Number HR 63B 6783, being driven in a rash and negligent manner by respondent No. 1. As a consequence, the appellant fell down and sustained grievous injuries resulting in 85% permanent physical disability in her left lower limb.

3. Upon a claim petition being filed, the learned Tribunal has, after holding that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of respondent no.1, awarded a compensation to the appellant under the following heads-

4. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Learned Tribunal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as a result of the accident the appellant has sustained permanent physical disability of 85% in her left lower limb and, as a consequence, she had to undergo treatment for a period over 8 months during which period she was suffering from acute recurring pain. He submits that though the pain has, with the passage of time, reduced to some extent, even today the appellant suffers from acute pain intermittently. He, therefore, contends that the amount of Rs.75,000/- granted as compensation towards "Pain and Suffering" is highly inadequate. Furthermore, because of the permanent disability in her left leg the appellant is not in a position to properly enjoy the amenities of life and therefore contends that an amount of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for "Loss of Amenities" also be enhanced. He, further, submits that as a result of this permanent disability, the marriage prospects have also been severely compromised and the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards "Loss of Marriage Prospects" be enhanced. He, therefore, prays that the compensation under the non-pecuniary heads of `Pain and suffering' `Loss of amenities of life' and `Loss of marriage prospects' be suitably enhanced.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1, as also respondent no.3, support the impugned award by urging that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and fair. They submit that while awarding compensation, the learned Tribunal has considered all the relevant factors and, therefore, pray that the appeal be dismissed.

7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I am inclined to accept the appellant's plea that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal under the aforesaid three non-pecuniary heads i.e. `Pain and Sufferin', `Loss of Amenities' and `Loss of Marriage Prospects' is on the lower side. Taking into account that the appellant is a young lady aged only about 28 years who not only had to undergo prolonged medical treatment for over 8 months but is, even now, suffering from 85% permanent disability in her left leg causing her recurring