JUDGMENT H.N. Nagamohan Das, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 6th November, 2009 in MVC No. 3145 of 2008 passed by the MACT at Bailhongal. In a motor accident on 7-12-2008, the appellant sustained injuries. On the date of the accident, appellant was aged about 40 years and he was an agriculturist. The medical evidence on record discloses that appellant suffered disability to several parts of the body, in all, amounting to 55% disability. The Tribunal had taken only 15% disability to the whole body. Even the income taken by the Tribunal at Rs. 3,000/- per month is on lower side. By considering the evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,60,830/- under the following heads: 2. The first grievance of the appellant is that the compensation awarded under the head 'loss of future earning' at Rs. 86,400/- is on the lower side. On the date of the accident, appellant was aged about 40 years. The proper multiplier is 15'. The medical evidence on record discloses that appellant suffered disability to several parts of the body, in all, amounting to 55% disability. The Tribunal had taken 15% disability to the whole body. The settled position of law is that a minimum of 1/3rd is to be taken as disability to the whole body. In that event, 18% disability to the whole body is to be taken. On the date of the accident on 7-12-2008, the appellant was doing agriculture. In support of this contention, appellant produced the RTC extracts as per Ex. P.13. A minimum of Rs. 4,000/- is to be taken as monthly income of the appellant. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for compensation under the head "loss of earning capacity" as under: Rs. 4,000 x 12 x 15 x 18/100 = Rs. 1,29,600/-. The second contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the compensation awarded under the head loss of income during laid up period, attendants charges, nourishment etc., is on the lower side. The appellant had undergone a surgery and he was an inpatient in the hospital. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for additional compensation of Rs. 5,000/- under these heads. Further, the Tribunal awarded only a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards future medical expenses and on the face of it, it is on the lower side. The appellant had undergone a surgery and he was an inpatient in the hospital. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for additional compensation of Rs. 5,000/- under these heads. Further, the Tribunal awarded only a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards future medical expenses and on the face of it, it is on the lower side. Having regard to the hike in medical expenses, I am of the considered opinion that another sum of Rs. 5,000/- is to be awarded. In all, the appellant is entitled for additional compensation of Rs. 53,200/-. Accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is partly allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 6-11-2009 in MVC No. 3145 of 2008 passed by MACT, Baihongal is modified enhancing the total compensation from Rs. 1,60,830/- to Rs. 2,14,030/-. (iii) Remaining all other aspects, in the impugned award remains intact and undisturbed. Appeal Partly Allowed.