JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal for enhancement of compensation is directed against judgment and award dated 01.09.2006 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chittorgarh ('the Tribunal'), whereby, for the injuries suffered by the claimant-appellant, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 80,000/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing application for compensation ('the application') i.e. 06.01.2004. 2. The facts in brief may be noticed thus: on 04.10.2003 at about 01.30 PM the appellant-claimant was travelling on a motor cycle from Nimbahera to Chittorgarh, when a Truck being driven by non-claimant respondent No.1 Badri Chandra hit the claimant from behind, which resulted in the claimant suffering multiple fractures. 3. The application for compensation was filed before the Tribunal seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,96,000/-. It was, inter alia, claimed that the claimant was working with J.K. Factory and was getting salary @ Rs. 3,500/- per month. The claimant suffered grievous injuries, wherein he suffered multiple fractures in his Arm, Thigh and in his Back-bone etc., which has resulted in permanent disablement. A reply was filed to the application and the averments made in the application were disputed. 4. The Tribunal after considering the evidence available on record, came to the conclusion that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving by driver of the Truck Badri Chandra, which resulted in, the claimant suffering grievous injuries. 5. While considering the issue relating to the grant of compensation, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 19,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs. 4,000/- towards loss of income for a period of 1.5 months and, thereafter, awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs. 57,000/- towards pain and suffering and future loss of income. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal has not considered the documentary evidence available on record in correct perspective and has ignored several documents. It was further submitted that in place of awarding a lump sum compensation, the Tribunal should have awarded compensation for loss of income and pain & suffering, separately. Reliance was placed on judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sublaxmi v. M.D., Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation & Anr., 2012(2) ACTC (SC) 1262 and K. Suresh v. New India Assurance Company Limited & Anr., 2012 (2) ACTC (SC) 1025 . 7. Reliance was placed on judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sublaxmi v. M.D., Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation & Anr., 2012(2) ACTC (SC) 1262 and K. Suresh v. New India Assurance Company Limited & Anr., 2012 (2) ACTC (SC) 1025 . 7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent supported the award impugned. 8. I have considered the rival submissions. 9. From the perusal of award passed by the Tribunal and the record, it is apparent that the claimant, firstly remained hospitalization for a period of 9 days between 10.10.2003 to 19.10.2003 vide Exhibit-144 and then for a period of 13 days between 27.10.2003 to 09.11.2003 vide Exhibit-18. However, the Tribunal ignoring the document (Exhibit-144), has assumed that the appellant remained hospitalized for 9 days. Further, for the period of hospitalization, the Tribunal has not awarded any amount relating to the day to day expenses for the said period, which the appellant is entitled to @ Rs. 300/- per day i.e. 22X300=6,600/-. 10. Further, the Tribunal has taken a period of 1.5 months as a period during which the appellant could not join his duties and has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,000/- for the said period. It is apparent that the accident occurred on 04.10.2003 and till about 09.11.2003 the appellant was last discharged from the hospital and usually in orthopedic issues, it takes about 6 weeks in the person joining back his usual duties, therefore, the period of 1.5 months deserves to be enhanced to 3 months and, consequently, the appellant would be entitled to another sum of Rs. 4,000/-. One receipt (Exhibit-142) which related to transportation issued in relation to the use of Ambulance amounting to Rs. 810/- has been rejected by the Tribunal on the ground that the said receipt bears the name of appellant's brother. It is not unusual that in cases like the present, the receipts are issued in the name of person, who goes for getting the vehicle and, therefore, on that ground the said amount could not have been refused. Consequently, the appellant would be entitled to the said sum of Rs. 810/- as well. 11. It is not unusual that in cases like the present, the receipts are issued in the name of person, who goes for getting the vehicle and, therefore, on that ground the said amount could not have been refused. Consequently, the appellant would be entitled to the said sum of Rs. 810/- as well. 11. So far as the award for loss of future income is concerned, it is apparent that the appellant, who was working as Assistant Gauger as per Exhibit-25 and suffered permanent disablement to the extent of 12% as per the report of the medical board [Exhibit-18(Second)], would have definitely suffered loss of future income. The Tribunal has granted a lump sum compensation under the two heads i.e. loss of income as well as pain and suffering, which are apparently contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sublaxmi (supra) and K. Suresh (supra). Therefore, taking the income of the appellant @ Rs. 2,700/- per month and in view of his age i.e. 27 years applying a multiplier of 17, the appellant would be entitled to (2700X12X17X12/100) Rs. 66,096/-. 12. Further, on account of pain and suffering because of repeated hospitalization, various operations, multiple fractures and permanent disablement, the appellant would be entitled to a sum Rs. 25,000/- towards pain and suffering. 13. Consequently, the appellant would be entitled to the compensation as follows:- (a) Medical Expenses - Rs. 19,000/- (b) Hospitalization Expenses - Rs. 6,600/- (c) Conveyance Expenses - Rs. 810/- (d) Loss of income during the period of hospitalization and subsequent thereto - Rs. 8,000/- (e) Loss of inocme on account of Disablement - Rs. 66,096/- (f) Pain and Suffering - Rs. 25,000/- Total Sum - Rs. 1,25,506/- Total Lump Sum - Rs. 1,25,500/- 14. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. In that view of the above discussion, the appellant would be entitled to a further sum of Rs. 45,500/- alongwith interest @ 6% from the date of application i.e. 06.01.2004 till the date of payment. The amount of enhanced compensation be paid to the claimant within a period of two months.No costs.Appeal partly allowed. *******