JUDGMENT Mr. Vijender Singh Malik, J.:- This is an appeal brought by the claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,Bhiwani (for short, “the Tribunal”) vide award dated 10.2.2011, vide which he was awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.56,567/- for the injuries suffered by the appellant. The facts necessary to decide this appeal can be reproduced as under: 2. In the accident that occurred on 16.11.2008 by respondent No.1 by driving vehicle No.HR-61-8275 at very high speed, the appellant claimed to have suffered injuries on his right foot. He lost his big toe and two adjoining toes on the right foot in the operation that was conducted thereon. He claimed himself to be a driver and an agriculturist earning Rs.17,000/- per month. He further claimed himself to have been rendered permanently disabled. He also claimed Rs.70,000/- to have been spent on his treatment which was said to be still continuing. In all, a sum of Rs. 15 lacs was claimed as compensation. 3. While resisting the claim petition, respondents No.1 and 2, the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle respectively took some preliminary objections. It is relevant to note that they claimed the appellant to have suffered injuries with some other object and to have concocted the story of the accident. 4. The Insurance company resisting the claim petition claimed that no intimation regarding the accident had been received by it and so it is not liable to pay compensation. It was also averred that the driver of the vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving license. Plea of collusion between the claimant and the driver/owner was also raised. It was denied that he was earning Rs. 17,000/- per month or he had spent Rs. 70,000/- on his treatment or that he became permanently disabled. 5. Parties led their respective evidence. Hearing learned counsel representing them, learned Tribunal awarded compensation in a sum of Rs. 56,567/- to the claimant vide the impugned award. The following is the table prepared by the Tribunal while assessing the compensation:- 1). Actual amount spent on purchase of medicines. Rs. 7,567-00 2) Disability Rs.30,000-00 3). Pain and suffering Rs.10,000-00 4). Loss of Income for two months @ Rs.4500/- per month Rs.9,000-00 Total Rs.56,567-00 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the appellant has been aged 47 years. Actual amount spent on purchase of medicines. Rs. 7,567-00 2) Disability Rs.30,000-00 3). Pain and suffering Rs.10,000-00 4). Loss of Income for two months @ Rs.4500/- per month Rs.9,000-00 Total Rs.56,567-00 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the appellant has been aged 47 years. According to him, as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, [2009(3) Law Herald (SC) 2107 : 2010(1) Law Herald (Acc.) (SC) 65] : 2009 (3) RCR (Civil) 77, the multiplier of 13 is available to assess compensation in this case. According to him, the appellant had been a truck driver and there is disability of 16%. He has submitted that the amount assessed as compensation is on lower side and no amount has been assessed as compensation under the heads of attendant charges, transportation charges etc. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.3 has submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is also on higher side. According to him, the claimant is not a truck driver and he claimed himself to be an agriculturist. He has submitted that the disability is of 16% only and amount of Rs. 30,000/- has been rightly assessed as compensation for that. 8. A sum of Rs. 7,567/- is assessed as compensation for the amount spent on purchase of medicines. The claimant has lost his three toes of the right foot and he must have been in pain and agony during the period of his treatment. It cannot be said that all the bills had been collected by his attendants during his treatment. At least some amount should have been awarded considering the expenses incurred without obtaining bills. Nothing has come on the record to prove the holding of the claimant. Treating him as a labourer, a sum of Rs.4,500/- has been taken as income of the claimant. Taking Rs.4,500/- as income of the claimant, the Tribunal has assessed Rs. 30,000/- only as compensation for the disability. There is no reason why the claimant was not taken as a driver and was treated as a labourer. A driver who has lost his three toes would lose much on his capability to drive a vehicle. 9. In these circumstances, I assess the following amounts as compensation:- 1) Cost of medicines. Rs. 10,000-00 2) Compensation for suffering the disability Rs. A driver who has lost his three toes would lose much on his capability to drive a vehicle. 9. In these circumstances, I assess the following amounts as compensation:- 1) Cost of medicines. Rs. 10,000-00 2) Compensation for suffering the disability Rs. 60,000-00 3) Pain and suffering Rs. 20,000-00 4) Loss of Income for two months. Rs. 12,000-00 5) Transportation and Attendant’s charges Rs. 20,000-00 Total Rs. 1,22,000-00 10. Consequently, the appeal is allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs. 56,567/- to Rs. 1,22,000/- with other terms regarding rate of interest etc. appearing in the award of the Tribunal remaining the same. ---------0.B.S.0------------ ———————————