Hon'ble GUPTA, J.— This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation against the award dated 29.1.1999 passed in MAC No. 324/1998. 2. The present appellant filed a claim petition for the injuries sustained by in a motor accident occurred on 26.9.2008. The brief facts of the claim petition are that on 26.9.1998, at about 9.00 p.m., the appellant was going by cycle towards ice factory. When he reached near Kataria Crossing, a mini bus No. RJ 14-P 5615 being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1 Satya Narayan hit the appellant and he sustained injuries. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 87,500/- as compensation. 3. The contention of the present appellant is that he was about 25 years old at the time of accident and was working as Sweeper in the Nagar Nigam. His monthly salary was Rs. 3,500/- per month and due to accident he has not recovered fully and still he is having difficulty in walking, standing, sitting and as per the opinion of the medical board, he is having a permanent disability to the extent of 26.54%. It has also been submitted that he spent a sum of Rs. 80,000/- in his treatment and the treatment is still going on. His earning capacity has been decreased and in the head of loss of income, higher amount should have been awarded. 4. The learned Tribunal has considered the material on record and the factum of permanent disability. It has been observed that due to permanent disability, the appellant is having difficulty in sitting cross-legs and hence Rs. 50,000/- has been awarded in the head of permanent disability, mental and physical agony and discomfort. No evidence has been produced before the Tribunal that there is any loss in earning capacity or loss of income has been occurred due to the accident. Hence, there is no infirmity in the compensation calculated and awarded. Further bills of treatment has also been compensated by the learned Tribunal and no evidence has been produced before the Tribunal that present appellant is still bad-ridden or in continuous treatment. 5. Hence, looking at the above, the compensation award by the tribunal is just, proper and adequate. There is no force in this appeal and the same is, therefore, dismissed.