JUDGMENT : N.K. Mody, J. This is an appeal filed by the claimant u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 2.5.2011 passed by XIV Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court, Indore in Claim Case No. 41 of 2011. By the impugned award, the Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 3,89,419 with interest to the claimant by way of compensation for the injury which appellant sustained in an accident. According to claimant, i.e., appellant herein, the compensation awarded is on lower side and hence needs to be enhanced. It is for the enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed this appeal. So the question that arises for consideration is whether any case for enhancement in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on facts/evidence adduced is made out in the compensation awarded and, if so, to what extent? It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle, who is liable for paying compensation, etc. It is for the reason that all these findings are recorded in favour of claimant by the Tribunal. Secondly, none of these findings though recorded in claimant's favour are under challenge at the instance of any of the respondents such as owner/driver either by way of cross-appeal or cross-objection. Therefore, there is no justification to burden the judgment by detailing facts on all these issues. 2. As observed supra, it is an injury case. Break-up of the amount awarded is as under : 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in a motor accident which took place on 12.2.2010, appellant who was aged 46 years at the relevant time sustained crush injuries and there was fracture of femur bone in right leg. Appellant was hospitalised at Arvind Hospital, Indore from where he was referred to Bombay Hospital and thereafter at Pune. Appellant was hospitalised for a total period of 3 weeks and his right leg was amputated from middle of thigh. It is submitted that as per medical evidence adduced, appellant sustained permanent disability to the extent of 80 per cent which was assessed as 40 per cent by the learned Tribunal and after assessing the income at Rs. 3,000 per month and applying the multiplier of 15, the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,89,419. It is submitted that as per medical evidence adduced, appellant sustained permanent disability to the extent of 80 per cent which was assessed as 40 per cent by the learned Tribunal and after assessing the income at Rs. 3,000 per month and applying the multiplier of 15, the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,89,419. It is submitted that income assessed so also the permanent disability assessed is on lower side and under other heads also the amount awarded is inadequate, hence prayed that appeal be allowed and amount be enhanced. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 3, insurance company, submits that permanent disability and also the income assessed by the learned Tribunal is just and proper as the appellant himself has alleged that his age was 46 years, therefore the learned Tribunal was not justified in applying the multiplier of 15 by assessing the age of the appellant in the age group of 40-45 years. It is submitted that appeal has no merits and the same be dismissed. Part II of the Schedule to the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 lays down the list of injuries deemed to result in permanent total disablement, of which clauses (17) and (18) read as under : (17) Amputation below hip with stump not exceeding 12.70 cm in length measured from tip of great trenchanter but not beyond middle thigh, the percentage of loss of earning capacity should be treated as 80 per cent. (18) Amputation below hip with stump exceeding 12.70 cm in length measured from tip of great trenchanter but not beyond middle thigh, the percentage of loss of earning capacity should be treated as 70 per cent. Since the amputation of leg of the appellant is below the hip with stump exceeding 12.70 cm in length, therefore, the permanent disability ought to have been assessed as 70 per cent instead of 40 per cent. Since the appellant is a resident of Indore and the accident is of the year 2010, therefore the income assessed at Rs. 3,000 appears to be on lower side which ought to have been Rs, 4,000 per month. In view of this, appellant is entitled for the following amount : Thus, appellant is entitled for a sum of Rs. 6,70,419 instead of Rs. 3,89,419. The enhanced amount of Rs. 3,000 appears to be on lower side which ought to have been Rs, 4,000 per month. In view of this, appellant is entitled for the following amount : Thus, appellant is entitled for a sum of Rs. 6,70,419 instead of Rs. 3,89,419. The enhanced amount of Rs. 2,81,000 shall carry interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from the date of application. The amount awarded shall be deposited by the insurance company with the learned Tribunal and the learned Tribunal is directed to invest 80 per cent of the said amount on long-term fixed deposit in the name of appellant with the condition that the bank will not permit any loan or advance. Interest on the said amount shall be credited on monthly basis to S.B. account of appellant from where the amount can be withdrawn as per needs. However, on an application by the appellant, this condition could be modified by the learned Tribunal in exceptional circumstances, if made out by the appellant. This order shall be executable only upon payment of proportionate court-fee on the enhanced amount which be paid within 3 months from the date of this order. Registry to prepare memo of costs. The appellant's counsel shall provide c.c. of memo of costs to the counsel for the insurance company which shall thereafter deposit the enhanced amount with costs with the Tribunal within one month from the date of receipt of memo of costs. On failure to comply with the direction, no interest would be payable on the enhanced amount from the date of order till court-fee is actually paid and memo of costs is supplied to counsel for respondent insurance company. With the aforesaid modification, the appeal stands disposed.