JUDGMENT : M.D. SHAH, J. 1. By this first appeal, the appellant herein-original claimant has challenged the judgment and award dated 30.08.2012 passed by the M.A.C.T. (Auxi.) Modasa, District- Sabarkantha in M.A.C.P. No. 79 of 2007. 2. The claim petition was filed by the appellant claimant claiming compensation of Rs. 7,00,000/- for injury sustained on 08.11.2006. The applicants-original claimant was travelling in Motorcycle and he was driving the motorcycle. When the applicant reached near Bhavpur Patia at about 5.30 p.m. one motorcycle came from opposite direction and dashed with the motorcycle of the applicant. As a result, applicant received injuries. In this regard, complaint was also lodged with Modasa Rural Police Station. Therefore, the applicant herein filed claim petition for getting compensation. The learned Tribunal after considering oral and documentary evidence by order dated 30.08.2012 partly allowed the claim petition of the appellant herein. Against the said award, the appellant-original claimant has preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation. 3. It is submitted by learned advocate for the appellant herein that learned Tribunal has not properly appreciated evidence on record. It is also submitted that Tribunal has committed error in not accepting the income of the applicant as Rs. 35000/- as shown by the claimant. It is also submitted that Tribunal has committed error in applying 13 multiplier. Therefore, it is requested to allow this appeal. 4. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. This Court has gone through the judgment and award dated 30.08.2012 passed by the learned Tribunal together with oral as well as documentary evidence on record. 5. It is not in dispute that in the accident, applicant herein was driving the motorcycle and he received fracture injury and Tribunal has assessed 15 % disability as there was consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties. It is the contention of the appellant that as appellant was earing Rs. 5000/- being Secretary in the dairy and salary slip was produced vide Exh.64, Tribunal has committed error in not rightly considering the income of the appellant. However, appellant has not produced any evidence regarding agricultural income and income from milk business. Therefore, Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the appellant. This Court has gone through the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121 . 6. However, appellant has not produced any evidence regarding agricultural income and income from milk business. Therefore, Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the appellant. This Court has gone through the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121 . 6. Considering the facts and circumstances and considering the nature of injury sustained by the appellant herein and considering the rest taken by the appellant in the hospital and considering the evidence on record and ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (supra), in opinion of this Court, it would be just and proper to award Rs. 25,000/- as additional compensation to the appellant - original claimant and it would meet the ends of justice. 7. In view of above, the first appeal is partly allowed. The appellant-original claimant is entitled to get additional compensation of Rs. 25,000/- with 9% interest per annum on the additional compensation from the date of filing of the claim petition. Judgment and award dated 30.08.2012 passed by the M.A.C.T. (Auxi.) Modasa, District-Sabarkantha in M.A.C.P. No. 79 of 2007 is modified to the aforesaid extent. The remaining part of the judgment and award would remain unaltered. Record and Proceedings, if any, be sent to the concerned Tribunal forthwith. Appeal partly allowed.