The quantum of compensation awarded for the loss of life of a child in a motor accident should be just and reasonable, considering the principles of common law and the enhancement of compensation under no fault liability.

D. M. PATNAIK, J.

( 1 ) THE matter for decision is whether the award of compensation of Rs. 60,000/- for the loss of life of a child aged four years by the 2nd M. A. C. T. , Berhampur is sustainable in the eye of law and if so, whether the amount is excessive.

( 2 ) ONE Banita Kumari Sahu, daughter of the claimants died in a motor accident on 7-6-93 around 9. 30 a. m. on the P. W. D. road near village Jamagarada under the Buguda Police Station in the district of Ganjam. It is claimed that the driver of the vehicle bearing registration No. ORG 1136 drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and caused the accident.

( 3 ) THE appellant Insurance Company a well as the owner of the vehicle both contested the case. While the owner denied the rash and negligent driving by the driver, the Insurance Company took the plea of absence of valid insurance as well as absence of valid driving licence of the driver. The Tribunal framed the following issues :-1. Whether the vehicle bearing registration No. ORG 1136 was being driven in a rash and negligent manner causing death of Banita Kumari Sahu?2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation. If so, what should the quantum thereof?3. Whether the claim is entertainable as against all or any of the respondents?4. To what relief the claimants are entitled to?

( 4 ) MR. A. K. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Insurance Company with reference to the provisions of Sections 140, 141 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 strenuously submits that the award of compensation of Rs. 60,000/- in the case of death of a child is against the principle laid down by the apex Court as well as other High Courts including that of ours. The learned Counsel further contends with reference to the decisions cited by him in his memo that the compensation amount has never gone beyond an amount of Rs. 24,000/- in case of death of a child aged fourteen years. He refers to the decision reported in 1993 ACJ 174, Anjamuri Zeorge v. Cadala Rama Nageswara Rao.

( 5 ) MR. R. N. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the claimant-respondents also referred to various decisions including two decisions of this Court reported in 1997 (1) OLR 390, Ananda Chandra Behera v. Chairman, Orissa State Electricity Board and 1991 (1) ACJ 347, Raghunath Kar v. Shasikala Devi. It is strenuously urged that keeping in view the principles for awarding damages/compensation even in the case of electrocution and other cases of accidents causing loss of human life, the Court has taken a view of awarding just compensation which even sometimes has been more than the amount awarded in the present case. Mr. Mohanty also relies on a Full Bench decision of this Court reported in 1976 ACJ 239 : (AIR 1976 Orissa 175); National Insurance Co. v. Magikhia Das and submits that since the case has been contested by the owner of the vehicle, the Insurance Company shall be precluded from challenging quantum of award.

( 6 ) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties, gone through the impugned order and the materials on record. Though Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the Insurance Company draws my attention to the provisions of Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 draling with the compensation under no fault liability and compares the relative implications of the provisions of that section with Sections 141 and 166 of the said Act, yet, I do not feel it necessary to deal with that point since admittedly no claim was made initially under no fault liability for compensation. There is no dispute with regard to the finding of facts relating to the accident and the resultant death and of course with regard to the age of the deceased. The argument and counter-argument only touches the point in regard to the quantum of compensation awarded. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 50,000/- towards compensation for loss of life and Rs. 10,000/- for mental pain and agony of the parents. While it is the contention of Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the Insurance Company tha