Judgment : The Insurance Company has filed this appeal to reduce compensation. Before the Tribunal, the Insurance Company was permitted to contest the claim other than the grounds available under Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 2. Heard Sri Arun Ponappa, learned Counsel for Insurance Company and Sri R. Chandra Shekar, learned Counsel for claimant. 3. As per medical records and medical evidence, claimant had suffered segmental type I compound fractures of both bones of left leg. Fractures were reduced by closed reduction. The claimant was treated in Victoria hospital. He was an in-patient for a period of 13 days. At the time of accident, claimant was aged about 32 years. He was a vegetable hawker. On subsequent examination. P.W. 2-Dr. S.G. Shivaprakash has assessed permanent physical disability of left lower limb at 27% and of the whole body at 14%. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,71,500/- under following heads: (1) Pain and suffering Rs. 30,000/- (2) Medical expenditure Rs. 5,000/- (3) Loss of earnings during laid up period Rs. 12,000/- (4) Future medical expenses and loss of amenities Rs. 15,000/- (5) Loss of earning capacity and future loss of earning (Rs.4,000 x 12 x 16 x .14) Rs. 1,07,500/- (6) Incidental expenses Rs. 2,000/- 4. Sri Arun Ponappa, learned Counsel for the Insurance Company would submit that assessment of disability is on the higher side, so also the determination of income. The learned Counsel would further submit that accident took place on 27-6-2005. The Tribunal has determined the income of claimant at Rs. 4,000/- p.m. without there being any satisfactory evidence. 5. The learned Counsel for claimant would justify the impugned award. 6. The claimant is vegetable hawker. Therefore, considering the age, avocation and the uncertainties involved in his avocation, a sum of Rs. 3,000/- p.m. would be a reasonable estimate of his income. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head ‘loss of amenities’ and ‘future medical expenditure’. Instead, it has awarded compensation of Rs. 15,000/- by combining the heads ‘loss of amenities’ and ‘future medical expenditure’. Compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards ‘conveyance, attendants, nourishment and food’ is inadequate. Therefore, compensation awarded by the Tribunal needs modification and accordingly, it is modified as under: (1) Pain and suffering Rs. 30,000/- (2) Medical expenditure Rs. 5,000/- (3) Future medical expenses Rs. 15,000/- by combining the heads ‘loss of amenities’ and ‘future medical expenditure’. Compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards ‘conveyance, attendants, nourishment and food’ is inadequate. Therefore, compensation awarded by the Tribunal needs modification and accordingly, it is modified as under: (1) Pain and suffering Rs. 30,000/- (2) Medical expenditure Rs. 5,000/- (3) Future medical expenses Rs. 15,000/- (4) Loss of earning capacity and future loss of earning (Rs.3,000 x 12 x 16 x .14) Rs. 80,640/- (5) Loss of amenities and enjoyment of life Rs. 13,000/- (6) Conveyance, attendants, food and nourishment charges Rs. 5,000/- (7) Loss of earnings during laid up period Rs. 12,000/- 7. In the result, I pass the following order.- The appeal is accepted in part. The impugned award is modified. Compensation of Rs. 1,71,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is reduced to Rs. 1,60,640/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation. The payment and investment shall be in the ratio evolved in the impugned award. The amount deposited by the Insurance Company shall be transferred to the Tribunal. Parties are directed to bear their costs.