JUDGMENT 1. - This is an appeal under Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act by Sitaram against the award dated 9.6.1988 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, in Motor Accident Claim No. 315 of 1984. 2. On 6.3.1984 when the appellant was going from his village in his camel-cart, truck No. RRR 8555, driven by Mohan Singh, dashed against the cart of the appellant from the backside, as a result whereof the appellant received serious injuries causing fracture of the heel of his right foot and left foot was crushed. The said foot thereafter was removed. The fracture of right foot heel had also not been healed till the application under Section 110A of the aforesaid Act was filed. The appellant filed a claim for Rs. 7,78,000 the details of which are given below: Claims for loss of income out of earning from camel-cart Rs. 7,56,000/- Expenses for treatment 5,000/- Expenses for extra nourishment Rs. 5,000/- Claim for mental agony and bodily pain Rs. 10,000/- Damages to the camel-cart Rs. 7,000/- Total Rs. 7,78.000/- 3. The application was contested. 4. On the findings on various issues arrived at, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the truck by Mohan Singh, which was insured with National Insurance Co. Ltd. and that he suffered loss of income of Rs. 60/-per day. According to its finding the appellant would work on the camel-cart for only 25 days in a month and, therefore, he was entitled to get compensation for those 25 days. Calculating damages at the rate of Rs. 750/- per month, the total amount found payable to the appellant was Rs. 1,62,000/-. 5. The compensation was multiplied by 18 as the finding of the Tribunal was that he could survive only for 18 years; the appellant was 40 years of age at the time of accident. Out of Rs. 1,62,000/-, the Tribunal determined permanent incapacity to be reduced to 75 per cent and artificial limb could be used in place of the one which had amputated. Deducting 25 per cent, the total amount found by the Tribunal was at Rs. 25,000/-. To this figure the Tribunal added Rs. 15,000/- towards various other heads, the details of which are not required to be given for deciding the present appeal. 6. Deducting 25 per cent, the total amount found by the Tribunal was at Rs. 25,000/-. To this figure the Tribunal added Rs. 15,000/- towards various other heads, the details of which are not required to be given for deciding the present appeal. 6. Counsel for the appellant stated that the Tribunal having found that the appellant suffered a loss of Rs. 1,125/- per month, arbitrarily reduced it to Rs. 750/-. For this reduction, there was neither any claim of the respondents nor any justification for the Tribunal. Taking into account that all the 30 days in a month, camel-cart could not be taken out for unloading, the round figure, to which both the sides were agreed, was Rs. 1,000/- per month, appears to me to just and proper. Calculating the compensation on that basis, the same would be enhanced to Rs. 2,16,000/-. To this figure, Rs. 15,000/- further be added and thus the total would come to Rs. 2,31,000/-. Out of this same, learned Counsel for the insurance company stated that Rs. 1,36,500/- along with interest due on the same, has already been paid. Its liability now would be for the balance, on which interest would also be payable at the same rate of 12 per cent which was awarded by the Tribunal. 7. In the result, the appeal succeeds and is allowed in part.Appeal partly allowed. *******