DEEPAK VERMA, J. ( 1 ) APPELLANT Amjad was aged about 21 years on 23. 5. 2002 and was working as a mason when he had met with a motor road accident on the said date. Accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of tanker bearing registration no. MP 09-KC 1788. The said tanker was being driven by respondent No. 2, owned by respondent No. 1 and insured with the respondent No. 3. Due to rash and negligent driving of the tanker the appellant had sustained bodily injuries and was required to undergo treatment for several months, initially in the M. Y. Hospital at indore and thereafter in Verma Union Hospital, indore. The aforesaid facts are not in dispute before us. ( 2 ) FOR the permanent disability of 36 per cent sustained by the appellant in his left leg and shortening of leg by 2", Tenth additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, indore in M. V. Case No. 77 of 2002 decided on 20. 9. 2004, awarded a sum of rs. 1,30,000 together with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of application till it is actually paid against the respondents jointly and severally. This appeal has been preferred for enhancement on the ground that looking to the nature of permanent disability, suffered by the appellant, the amount awarded is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced. ( 3 ) WE have, accordingly, heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. To prove the permanent disability, appellant has examined Dr. Amit Sharma, pw 5. He has categorically deposed that even though there has been unification of the bone, but the permanent disability of the appellant continues at 36 per cent in the left leg and there is shortening of the said leg by 2". He has also deposed that it would not be possible for the appellant to squat on the floor and to work continuously either by standing or while sitting. He has also stated that movement of his legs has also been restricted due to the injuries which were sustained by him in the motor road accident. The appellant has deposed that after sustaining permanent disability in the aforesaid motor road accident, he has not been able to perform his duties as before. He has also stated that movement of his legs has also been restricted due to the injuries which were sustained by him in the motor road accident. The appellant has deposed that after sustaining permanent disability in the aforesaid motor road accident, he has not been able to perform his duties as before. ( 4 ) TO prove the income of the deceased, even though appellant examined Nizamuddin, pw 2, his alleged contractor, to show that he was being paid Rs. 4,500 per month, but this witness has not filed the accounts which he was maintaining to show that the appellant was in employment of this Nizamuddin, pw 2 and that he was being paid rs. 4,500 p. m. Thus except for oral evidence there is nothing on record to show the income of the deceased. The Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence available on record has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 2,000 p. m. and the loss of earnings during the period he was under treatment has been assessed at Rs. 12,000 but keeping in mind that the permanent disability was only to the tune of 36 percent a sum of Rs. 5,000 in this head has been awarded. For medical treatment also the amounts which were actually spent by the appellant have not been awarded. ( 5 ) LOOKING to the nature of the injuries sustained by the appellant, shortening of leg by 2", his young age and nature of work which he used to carry on earlier, in our considered opinion a lump sum amount would take care of all the losses which the appellant has sustained. In our considered opinion a total amount of Rs. 3,50,000 would be just, proper and adequate compensation to be awarded to the appellant. ( 6 ) THUS, this appeal is allowed to the extent mentioned hereinabove. The impugned award stands modified. Appellant would be entitled to receive in all from the respondents jointly and severally a sum of rs. 3,50,000 along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of application till it is actually paid. The respondents shall bear the cost of litigation throughout. Counsel's fee Rs. 1,000, if certified. Appeal allowed. .