ORDER 1. This is an appeal by special leave by an injured person impugning the judgment of the High Court in appeal against the award of compensation by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (herinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 2. The appellant is the original claimant before the Tribunal. While he was walking on the road at 4.00 p.m. on 12-7-1991, the jeep of the first respondent dashed against him. As a result of this accident, the appellant was injured and had to be hospitalised. The appellant remained as in-patient in the hospital for about 2 months after which he was discharged. The accident resulted in certain amount of deformity and restriction in the movement of the appellant's left leg which has been shortened by one-and-a-half inch. There was also restriction in the movement of left heel of the left foot, painful movement in the left hip and left knee coupled with development of arthritis and, as the evidence on record shows, there was 20% disability suffered by the appellant as a result of the accident. 3. The appellant moved the Tribunal at Bangalore and claimed a sum of Rs 2,50,000 as compensation. The Tribunal came to a finding that there was an accident which resulted in the injury to the appellant and that the accident was due to the negligence of the first respondent's employee for which the first respondent was liable. The Tribunal computed the compensation admissible to the appellant under different heads and awarded a total amount of Rs 33,000 under the following heads: 1. For pain and suffering Rs20,000 2. For medical expenses and nourishment charges Rs 7000 3. For future operation and nourishment charges Rs 4000 4. Loss of income during the period of treatment Rs 600 5. For permanent disability Rs 1400 Total Rs 33,000 It also directed that the amount of compensation as awarded be paid with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the claim petition till the date of deposit or payment. 4. Aggrieved by the awarded compensation, the appellant moved the High Court by an appeal under the provisions of the Act. The High Court after appreciation of the facts increased the amount of compensation by Rs 10,000 under the head "pain and suffering" and granted Rs 10,000 towards "permanent disability" as against Rs 1400 granted by the Tribunal. 4. Aggrieved by the awarded compensation, the appellant moved the High Court by an appeal under the provisions of the Act. The High Court after appreciation of the facts increased the amount of compensation by Rs 10,000 under the head "pain and suffering" and granted Rs 10,000 towards "permanent disability" as against Rs 1400 granted by the Tribunal. Thus, the High Court awarded a total sum of Rs 52,000 as compensation instead of Rs 33,000 awarded by the Tribunal. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Court. 5. We have perused the records with the help of the learned counsel on both sides and have also heard them. Considering that the major claim was the claim for permanent disability, which was certified to be 20% on the basis of the evidence of the doctor (PW 2) and that the claimant's income was found to be Rs 300 per month, we are satisfied that the compensation awarded by the High Court is quite just and proper. There is no scope for any improvement thereupon. We find no merit in this appeal, which is hereby dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.