The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for a fair balance in determining compensation and the principles for computing damages in favor of the parents for the death of their child, including the present value of pecuniary loss and the future contribution which the deceased would have made to them.

Varghese Kalliath, J.

1. This is an appeal by the parents of a child, who was killed in a motor accident. The victim was aged 5 years.

2. The unfortunate event happened on 3.12.1981 at 12.30 p.m. The victim, a five years old boy, was a student in the 1st standard. He was dashed by a motor cycle rashly and negligently driven by the 1st respondent herein. The 1st respondent contended that he was not negligent. But the Tribunal found that he was negligent and the accident was caused because of his rash and negligent driving of the vehicle. After the accident, the boy was removed to N.M. Hospital by a good Samaritan, who found the boy in a helpless condition. From that hospital, he was removed to the Medical Trust Hospital. On the next day, the boy died.

3. The parents claimed that the boy was intelligent, smart and healthy. A criminal case was launched against the motor-cyclist and he was found guilty under Sections 279 and 304-A, Indian Penal Code.

4. The vehicle has been insured by the 2nd respondent and that fact is admitted. There is no dispute that the life of a young child was bumped off by the negligent driving of the vehicle by the 1st respondent.

5. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence in the case, awarded a total compensation of Rs. 10,000/-. The appellants claimed only an amount of Rs. 48,000/-.

5-A The chief question that has to be decided in this case is as to the reasonability of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The appellants submit before us that they have claimed only a modest amount of compensation and the Tribunal ought to have allowed that amount in the circumstances of the case. The appellants are very much aggrieved and so they appeal.

6. The appellants claimed compensation under different heads. In part I, they claimed loss to the estate of the deceased Rs. 12,500/-and burial expenses Rs. 500/-. In part II, they claimed loss of expectancy of life Rs. 10,000/-, compensation for excruciating pain and suffering undergone by the injured because of the accident till death Rs. 10,000/- and loss of service of the deceased, their only son, Rs. 15,000/-. The Tribunal did not discuss what would be the reasonable compensation that can be given under the different heads of claim, but awarded a global amount perhaps taking into account all the heads of claim, an amount of Rs. 10,000/-.

7. The adjudication process to determine compensation in the case of loss of life of a young boy in a motor accident, according to us, is of a complex nature. What are the circumstances to be taken into account for awarding a justifiable, fair and reasonable compensation to the parents of a young boy who lost his life in a motor accident is a matter which requires deep consideration and a careful analysis. According to us, it depends upon many circumstances. It involves circumstances like the nature of the accident, the suffering of the boy on account of the accident, age of the victim, agony, pain and suffering of the parents on account of the death of their child, whether the parents have no other children/child, the age of the parents 1/ similar facts.

8. Counsel on both sides referred us to several decisions. Before considering the decisions referred to us by counsel on both sides, we would like to say certain general principles in regard to payment of compensation. If one person by his negligent act causes another person any kind of harm whether it is personal which will include mental and physical pain or damage to property or other financial loss, the remedy which is available in law to the injured person is an action to recover damages. If the harm has caused him deprivation of property, it is easy for the court to direct the party to compensate the person who suffered the loss by restoring the property itself. If restoration of the same property or an equivalent property is impossible, the court has to estimate the money value of the loss suffered by the party and the court can direct payment of, as damages, a sum