JUDGMENT B. SRBENIVASE GOWDA, J.—As both these appeals are arising out of a common judgment but different awards of the Tribunal, they are heard together, admitted and with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, they are disposed of finally by this common judgment. 2. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal. 3. As there is no dispute regarding injuries sustained by the claimants in a road traffic accident occurred on 15-9-07 due to rash, and negligent driving of KSRTC bus bearing registration No. KA-36-F-493 and liability of the Corporation, the only point that remains for my consideration in the appeal is: Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper or does it call for enhancement? 4. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and perusing the award of the Tribunal, I am of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it is on the lower side and, therefore, it is deserved to be enhanced. The claimant is one Smt. Kamala Bai. 5. As per wound certificate-Ex. P13 and discharge summary-Ex. P14, she had sustained the following injuries: (i) Type I right, bimallular fracture of leg, (ii) Type II displaced talar neck fracture and undisplaced fracture of left lateral mallulas. She was treated as inpatient in R.L. Jalappa Hospital from 15-9-07 up to 11-10-07 for a. period of 26 days. Injuries sustained and treatment taken by her are also evident from case sheet-Ex. P19, disability assessment notes-Ex. P20, x-rays-Ex. P21 and supported by oral evidence of the claimant and doctor examined as P.Ws. 3 and 5 respectively. P.W.5-Dr. P.V. Manohar has stated in his evidence that, claimant has suffered disability of 45% to right lower limb, 15% to left lower limb and 20% to whole body. 6. Considering three fractures sustained by the claimant, Rs. 48,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement under this head. 7. As Rs. 24,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses is based on the medical bills produced by the claimant for the said sum, the same is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement. 8. She was treated as inpatient for 26 days, Considering the same, Rs. 7. As Rs. 24,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses is based on the medical bills produced by the claimant for the said sum, the same is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement. 8. She was treated as inpatient for 26 days, Considering the same, Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards incidental expenses such as conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges is just and proper. 9. She claims to have been earning Rs. 5,000/- per month, by selling snacks and chats items. But the same is not established by producing any documents. In the absence of proof of income, considering age of the claimant as 45 years and year of accident as 2007, her income assessed by the Tribunal at Rs. 3,000/- per month is just and proper. Nature of injuries suggest, that she must have been under rest and treatment for a period of four months and, therefore, a sum of Rs. 12,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during said up period as against Rs. 9,000/- awarded by the Tribunal 10. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, disability stated by the doctor and an amount of discomfort and unhappiness which she has to undergo for the rest of her life, Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of amenities is just and proper. 11. Claimant is aged about 45 years. Multiplier applicable to her age group is ‘14’ Her income is assessed at Rs. 3,000/- p.m. Doctor has stated, she has suffered disability of 45% to right lower limb, 15% to left lower limb and 20% to whole body. So future loss of income works out to Rs. 1,00,800/- (Rs. 3,000/- x 12 x 20/100 x 14) and it is awarded. 12. Thus the claimant is entitled for the following compensation: (1) Pain and suffering Rs. 48,000/- (2) Medical expenses Rs. 24,000/- (3) Incidental expenses Rs. 15,000/- (4) Towards loss of income during laid up period Rs. 12,000/- (5) Towards loss of amenities Rs. 15,000/- (6) Future loss of income Rs. 1,00,800/- 13. Accordingly the appeal is allowed in part and the Judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated herein above. The claimant, is entitled for a total compensation, of Rs. 2,14,800/- as against Rs. 96,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 8% p.a. on the additional compensation of Rs. 1,00,800/- 13. Accordingly the appeal is allowed in part and the Judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated herein above. The claimant, is entitled for a total compensation, of Rs. 2,14,800/- as against Rs. 96,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 8% p.a. on the additional compensation of Rs. 1,18,800/- from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation. 14. The Corporation is directed to deposit the additional compensation amount, with interest within two months from the date of receipt of a. copy of this judgment. 15. Out of the additional compensation, Rs. 90,000/-with proportionate interest is ordered to be invested in F.D. in any nationalized or scheduled Bank or post office in the name of the claimant for a period of nine years, with a right of option for her to renew the deposit from time to time and withdraw interest periodically and the remaining amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be released in her favour. The claimant is one Smt. Shantha Bai. 16. As per wound certificate-Ex. P10 and discharge summary-Ex. P11, she had sustained the following injuries: Tenderness over left shoulder, tenderness over left side of neck, tenderness over left side of hip 5 cms. tenderness over at pubic region, fracture of left pubic rami, fracture of neck of left scapula and fracture of right illium and left sacro iliac joint. She was treated as impatient in R.L. Jalappa Hospital from. 15-9-07 up to 11-10-07 for a period of 28 days. Injuries sustained and treatment taken by her are also evident from ease sheet-Ex. P16, disability assessment notes-Ex. P17, x-rays-Ex. P18 and supported by oral evidence of the claimant and doctor examined as P.Ws.2 and 4 respectively. P.W.4-Dr. P.V. Manohar has stated in his evidence that, claimant has suffered disability of 10% to whole body. 17. Considering three fractures and other simple Injuries sustained by the claimant, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- is awarded towards pain and suffering as against Rs. 45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under this head. 18. As Rs. 4,500/- awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses is based on the medical bills produced by the claimant for the said sum, the same is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement. 19. She was treated as inpatient for 26 days. Considering the same, Rs. 45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under this head. 18. As Rs. 4,500/- awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses is based on the medical bills produced by the claimant for the said sum, the same is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement. 19. She was treated as inpatient for 26 days. Considering the same, Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards incidental expenses such as conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges is just and proper. 20. She claims to have been earning Rs. 5,000/- per month, by selling snacks and chats items. But the same is not established by producing any documents. In the absence of proof of income, considering age of the claimant as 50 years and year of accident as 2007, her income assessed by the Tribunal at. Rs. 3,000/- per month is just and proper. Nature of injuries suggest, that she must have been under rest and treatment for a period of four months and, therefore, a sum of Rs. 12,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during laid up period as against Rs. 9,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 21. Considering the nature of injuries, disability stated by the doctor and an amount of discomfort and unhappiness which she has to undergo for the rest of her life a sum of Rs. 15,000/- is awarded towards loss of amenities. 22. Claimant is aged about 50 years. Multiplier applicable to her age group is ‘13’. Her income is assessed at Rs. 3,000/- p.m. Doctor has stated, she has suffered disability of 10% to whole body. So loss of future income works out to Rs. 46,800/- (Rs. 3,000/- x 12 x 10/1.00 x 13) and it is awarded. 23. Thus the claimant, is entitled for the following compensation: (1) Pain and suffering Rs. 50,000/- (2) Medical expenses Rs. 4,500/- (7) Incidental expenses Rs. 15,000/- (8) Towards loss of income during laid up period Rs. 12,000/- (9) Towards loss of amenities Rs. 15,000/- (10) Future loss of income Rs. 46,800/- Total Rs. 1,43,300/- 24. Accordingly the appeal is allowed in part, and the Judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent, stated herein above. The claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 1,43,300/- as against Rs. 73,500/- awarded, by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. on the additional compensation of Rs. 46,800/- Total Rs. 1,43,300/- 24. Accordingly the appeal is allowed in part, and the Judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent, stated herein above. The claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 1,43,300/- as against Rs. 73,500/- awarded, by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. on the additional compensation of Rs. 69,800/- from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation. 25. The Corporation is directed to deposit the additional compensation amount with interest, within two months from, the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 26. Out of the additional compensation, Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest is ordered to be invested in F.D. in any nationalized or scheduled Bank in the name of the claimant for a period of nine years, with a right of option for her to renew the deposit from time to time and withdraw interest periodically and the remaining amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be released in her favour. 27. No order as to costs.