Compensation for personal injury must be just and not excessive, reflecting actual losses and suffering.

1. By this common order the above - mentioned two appeals are being disposed of as they arise out of one and same award dated 15.5.2004 passed in Claim Case No. 92 of 2002 by the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Baikunthpur, District Koria.

2. The undisputed facts are that claimant Beer Narayan Singh was travelling on a tractor bearing registration No. MP 27 - B 3422 or trolley bearing registration No. MP 27 - B 3424. The claimant received injuries in the accident and according to him his right hand was amputated below the shoulder and, therefore, he claimed compensation. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the income of the claimant - injured at Rs. 60 per day, i.e., Rs. 1,800 per month and held that physical disablement of the claimant was 50 per cent and calculating the loss of earnings on account of amputation at Rs. 61,200, awarded total compensation of Rs. 76,200 including Rs. 15,000 for medical expenses. The Claims Tribunal has exonerated the insurance company from liability of payment of compensation. During the pendency of the appeals, the owner had died and his legal representatives have been brought on record.

3. Claimant Beer Narayan Singh has filed MA No. 815 of 2004 claiming enhancement of compensation and owners of the tractor and trolley have filed MA No. 978 of 2004, wherein challenge has been made both to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal and to the exoneration of the insurance company from liability of payment of compensation.

4. The first issue for determination is whether the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper.

5. The principles with regard to determination of just compensation contemplated under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are well settled. Injuries cause deprivation to the body which entitles the claimant to claim damages. The damages may vary according to the gravity of the injuries sustained by the claimant in an accident. On account of the injuries, the claimant may suffer consequential losses such as, (i) loss of earnings; (ii) expenses on treatment which may include medical expenses, transportation, special diet, attendant charges, etc., (iii) loss or diminution to the pleasures of life by loss of a particular part of the body, and (iv) loss of future earning capacity. The damages can be pecuniary as well as non - pecuniary, but all have to be assessed in rupees and paisa.

6. It is impossible to equate human suffering and personal deprivation with money. However, this is what the Motor Vehicles Act enjoins upon the courts to do. The court has to make a judicious attempt to award damages, so as to compensate the claimant for the loss suffered by him. Such compensation is what is termed as just compensation. On the one hand, the compensation should not be assessed very conservatively, but on the other hand, the compensation should also not be assessed in so liberal a fashion so as to make it a bounty to the claimant. The court while assessing the compensation should have regard to the degree of deprivation and the loss caused by such deprivation. The compensation or damages assessed towards the personal injuries should be substantial damages to compensate the injured for deprivation suffered by him throughout his life. They should not be just token damages. There are numerous cases where the principles for grant of compensation have been enunciated. It would be relevant to quote pertinent observations from a few.

7. The following observations of Lord Morris in his speech in H. West & Son Ltd. v. Sh