The main legal point established is the need for adequate compensation for physical injury, treatment, loss of earning, pain, suffering, trauma, and loss of amenities due to disability caused by the accident.

G.D. Saxena, J.

This appeal u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 has been preferred by the claimant/appellant against an Award dated 7th August 2004 in a Claim Case No. 43/2002 by the First Additional Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Morena (M.P.), seeking enhancement of the compensation amount. The facts, in short, relevant for decision of this appeal are that on 2nd April 2002 at about 3-30 p.m., injured Miss Puja, aged 4 years alongwith her grandfather was standing on the road side. At that time, suddenly a Mini Bus bearing No. MP07/F 806, owned by the M.P. State Transport Corporation and driven by respondent No. 4 came and hit the child. A wheel of the bus run over the legs of injured causing severe injuries to her body. An F.I.R. was lodged against the accused-driver of the bus on which a crime for offence under sections 279 and 338 of I.P.C. was registered and after investigation, the charge sheet was filed before the Criminal Court. The injured got treatment in various specialized hospitals under supervision of eminent Surgeons and Physicians. Huge money was spent on her treatment. Lastly, her right leg was amputated. A claim petition seeking an award of Rs. 5,20,000/- was filed. However, the learned tribunal after considering the entire evidence passed an award of Rs. 1,50,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition till full and final realisation of the amount.

2. The submissions on behalf of the claimant/appellant are that the learned tribunal without considering the evidence on record and without considering the law in this regard passed the award which is on lower side. It is submitted that the tribunal did not appreciate the evidence properly while awarding compensation and overlooked the factual position that the appellant has become paraplegic on account of injuries received in an accident throughout of her life and her bright future is totally diminished. Virtually, she has suffered a painful life after such an accident. It is submitted that the claimant even after completion of treatment and amputation of leg has become totally dependent on the calipers. The accident was proved to be direct result of rash and negligent driving of the employed driver of the State Transport Corporation. Under these circumstances, it is prayed that the amount of award as passed by the tribunal may be enhanced up to the extent of Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest as awarded by the learned tribunal including the cost of the present appeal.

3. The respondents have not filed any cross-objection assailing the impugned Award but simply denied the averments of the petition as well as the accident on the part of their employed driver with a prayer to set aside the Award.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Also perused the record of the case and the relevant law.

5. Before proceeding to determine as to what should be just amount of compensation in the light of the nature of injuries received by the appellant, this court may deal with one of the questions raised, namely, whether it will be permissible to make an award in excess of the amount as claimed in the petition.

6. When one is considering the case of a gravely injured child who is going to live for many years into adult life, very different considerations apply. There are compelling social reasons why a sum of money should be awarded for his future loss of earnings. The money will be required to care for him. Take the present case. It is not a case where damages have been awarded which will provide a sufficient sum for her and be cared for at all times. Damages awarded for her future loss of earnings will in the future be available to provide a home for her and to feed her and provide for such extra comforts as she can appreciate. It cannot be assumed that her parents will remain able to house, feed and care for her throughout the rest of her life. If, of course, damages have been awarded on the basis of the full cost of residential care so that they