JUDGMENT : The claimant is in appeal questioning the judgment and award passed in MVC No. 3153 of 2006, dated 18-1-2007 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, and is seeking enhancement of compensation in this appeal. 2. The facts in nutshell are as follows.— The accident in question and the injuries suffered as also issuance of policy to the offending vehicle is not in dispute. On consideration of the pleadings and evidence on record. Tribunal allowed the claim petition in part awarded a sum of Rs. 89,708/- under the following heads.— (a) Injury, pain and suffering Rs. 30,000/- (b) Medical expenses Rs. 18,108/- (c) Loss of Income during the period treatment Rs. 600/- (d) Conveyance and nourishing food Rs. 10,000/- (e) Future medical expenses Rs. 6,000/- (f) Towards loss of amenities Rs. 25,000/- Total Rs. 89,708/- It is that judgment and award which is questioned in this appeal. 3. I have heard Sri. K.V. Shyamaprasada, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri C. Shankar Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for respondent 2. 4. Though several grounds are urged in the appeal memorandum Sri Shyamaprasada would contend that Tribunal has erred in not awarding any compensation to claimant under the heading loss of future income and also seeks for enhancement of compensation under the heading loss of amenities and loss of income-during the period of treatment. 5. Per contra Sri Shankar Reddy, would contend that compensation awarded by Tribunal is in fact excessive and submits that same does not call for any interference. 6. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award, it seen from evidence of P.W 2-Doctor who has opined that the fracture of ilium there is mal-union and on account of the injury sustained there is whole body disability to the extent of 10%. As to the basis on which the whole body disability arrived is neither spoken to nor explained by Doctor in his evidence. That apart, it is the case of claimant that he has been working as a post master and by virtue of injury he has not been able to discharge his functions. As to the basis on which the whole body disability arrived is neither spoken to nor explained by Doctor in his evidence. That apart, it is the case of claimant that he has been working as a post master and by virtue of injury he has not been able to discharge his functions. However, it has not been established by the claimant that on account of the injury sustained in the accident in question he has been either removed from service or that his income is reduced on account of the injury sustained in the accident. In the absence of said evidence it cannot be held that claimant would be entitled to loss of future income. Accordingly said prayer is rejected. 7. Considering the evidence of Doctor and also the nature of injury sustained and the treatment obtained by claimant, this Court of the considered opinion that claimant would have been unable to discharge his duties at least for a period of 2 months and as such compensation under the heading loss of income during the treatment period is required to be awarded at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- p.m. and accordingly Rs. 6,000/- is awarded. Since Tribunal has already awarded a sum of Rs. 600/-under the said heading, the same is required to be deducted and claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs. 5,400/-under the heading loss of income during treatment period. 8. Tribunal having considered the evidence on record has come to a conclusion that on account of the disability suffered by claimant he would be entitled to Rs. 25,000/-towards loss of amenities and the injury being fracture of right pelvis and considering the age of the claimant and also the evidence of the doctor the same requires to be enhanced marginally by awarding a further sum of Rs. 5,000/-under the heading loss of amenities. Accordingly Rs. 5,000/-by way of additional compensation is awarded under the heading loss of amenities. In view of the above discussion, the following order is passed ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) Compensation as awarded by Tribunal is enhanced by awarding an additional sum of Rs. 10,400/- which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a from the date of petition till the date of payment or deposit. In view of the above discussion, the following order is passed ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) Compensation as awarded by Tribunal is enhanced by awarding an additional sum of Rs. 10,400/- which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a from the date of petition till the date of payment or deposit. (iii) The said amount shall be deposited by the second respondent within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Since the enhancement made is marginal, no order for deposit is made. (iv) No order as to costs.