Satish Chandra, J- 1. The present appeal, for enhancement of the compensation, has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1983 against the judgment/award dated 30.11.2007, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gonda in M.A. C. No. 10 of 2006 where the compensation of Rs.1,11,200/- was awarded in favour of the claimant-appellant. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 05.09.2005, the appellant Manoj Kumar Tiwari was waiting for a vehicle on the Gonda-Lucknow National Highway for going to Katra. In the meantime, a Tempo bearing No. U.P. 42 T-0343, whose driver was driving the tempo very rashly and negligently, hit the appellant. The appellant was immediately taken to district hospital, Gonda from where he was referred to Medical College, Lucknow. There was permanent fracture in his legs and he became 40% disable, as per the Medical Certificate. The appellant has filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, who observed that the Tempo was plying without any permit and the driver was not holding a valid driving license. So, the compensation was awarded in favour of the appellant-claimant by taking the notional income of Rs.15000/-. The claimant was aged about 36 years. So, the multiplier of 16 was applied. By taking the 40% of the notional income, the compensation comes to Rs.96,000/-. In addition, the medical expenses of Rs.8,000/-, food expenses of Rs.1100/- and other expenses of Rs.6100/- were also awarded. Thus, total compensation of Rs.1,11,200/- was awarded in favour of the appellant. Not being satisfied, the appellant has filed the present appeal for enhancement of the compensation. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant, who submits that there is a permanent fracture in his legs. So, he made a request that the compensation may be enhanced. Except this, no other plea was taken by him. None appeared on behalf of the opposite parties. 4. After hearing leaned counsel for the appellant and on perusal of record, it appears that the tempo in question was used as taxi having the capacity of seven passengers on the date of accident. Its driver was not holding a valid permit as the same was only for a period 07.09.2005 to 06.09.2010. The accident was prior to it i.e. 05.09.2005. The driver was also not holding a valid driving license. Its driver was not holding a valid permit as the same was only for a period 07.09.2005 to 06.09.2010. The accident was prior to it i.e. 05.09.2005. The driver was also not holding a valid driving license. So, the liability was rightly fixed on the vehicle owner as well as on insurance company jointly and severally. 5. Regarding the claim, it appears that the claimant was 36 years of age and he was engaged in the labour work. So, the notional income of Rs.15000/- was rightly taken by the Tribunal. As per the medical certificate, there was a compound fracture in both the legs. So, 40% disability was proved and the multiplier of 16 was rightly applied. The appellant was admitted in the Gandhi Memorial Hospital w.e.f. 06.9.2005 to 16.09.2005 for which the medical expenses of Rs.8000/-, food expenses of Rs.1100/- and other expenses of Rs.6100/- were awarded. Thus, total compensation of Rs.1,11,200/- along with 7.5% interest was awarded in favour of the claimants-respondents. 6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the award appears reasonable specially when no other material was brought on record. Moreover, the appeal is time barred for more than two and a half years and no cogent reason has been given for filing the belated appeal. 7. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, which is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. 8. The appeal being devoid of merit, is dismissed.