RAFIQ, J.—This appeal has been preferred by the appellant for enhancement, who in an injury case has been awarded a sum of Rs.52,000/-. 2. Contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that as a result of accident, the appellant sustained permanent disability of 8.84% i.e. approximately 9%. He has been subjected to surgery for at least three occasions. His pain and agony was enormous, yet the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.34,000 cumulatively for pain and suffering, mental agony, permanent disability and loss of enjoyment of life whereas, this amount would be much more than that. 3. Shri Sandeep Mathur, learned counsel for the appellant has argued that if the compensation would be calculated as per the structured formula, appellant would be roughly entitled to Rs.1,25,000 on the basis of income and the multiplier applicable to his case. The Tribunal has not given any basis as to how he has arrived at such amount of compensation. 4. Shri V.P. Mathur, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the appeal and submitted that the accident took place in the year 1998 and therefore the amount of Rs.34,000 awarded under above stated head in that year would be much more than Rs.1,25,000, which has been claimed by the appellant as per the present value. It was argued that appellant was the permanent employee with the bank and therefore, his disability did not result in any loss of income to him, however, the Tribunal has additional awarded a sum of Rs.17,000 for loss of income and Rs.1,000 for medical expenses, nutritious diet and travelling expenses. 5. On hearing learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent, I find that although it is true that the appellant was working with the bank and this accident did not result in actual loss of income to him and the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.17,000 under this head, but even then the award of Rs.34,000 for the pain an suffering, mental agony, permanent disability and loss of enjoyment of life is not justified especially when it is shown that he was subjected to surgery on as many as three occasions. He sustained three fractures and also other simple injuries, for which separate compensation has to be awarded in an injury case. 6. He sustained three fractures and also other simple injuries, for which separate compensation has to be awarded in an injury case. 6. The appellant is therefore held entitled to a sum of Rs.25,000 for pain and agony, Rs.15,000 for the permanent disability, Rs.15,000 for the injuries sustained by him and Rs.10,000 for loss of enjoyment of life. Thus in total he is entitled to a sum of Rs.65,000/- under this head. However, the amount of compensation under other heads i.e. Rs.17,000 for loss of income and Rs.1,000 for medical expenses, nutritious diet and travelling expenses is maintained. Thus the amount of compensation is enhanced from Rs.52,000 to Rs.83,000. The appellant shall also be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition on the enhanced amount of compensation. The appeal is partly allowed with the aforesaid direction.