JUDGMENT A.S. Pachhapure, J. 1. Though the matter is listed today for orders, with the consent of learned Counsel for both the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. The appellant dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident, has filed this appeal, seeking enhancement. 2. The facts reveal that on 21-8-2007 at about 1.30 p.m. when the appellant was proceeding by walk on the side of the road, the tractor bearing No. KA-33-T-3556-57 driven in a rash and negligent manner hit the appellant. Thereby, the appellant sustained grievous injuries; he was admitted in the hospital and suffered disability. Therefore made a claim before the Tribunal for compensation for pain, suffering, mental agony, medical expenses, loss of income etc. 3. During the enquiry, the claimant was examined as P.W. 1 and two doctors were examined as P.Ws. 2 and 3. In their evidence, the documents Exs. P. 1 to P. 12 were marked. No evidence was laid on behalf of the respondents. 4. The Tribunal, after hearing the learned Counsel on both sides and on appreciation of the evidence on record, granted a sum of Rs. 88,840/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. as compensation. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded, the present appeal is filed. 5. I have heard the learned Counsel for both the parties. 6. The point that arise for my consideration is: Whether the appellant is entitled to enhanced compensation? If so to what extent? 7. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the assessment of income and the compensation granted on each of the heads is on the lower side and needs enhancement. On the other hand, learned Counsel for respondent 2-insurer supports the judgment and award of the Tribunal. 8. As could be seen from the injury certificate-Ex. P. 5, the appellant has suffered: 1. Contusion on left lower leg measuring 1 x 1 c.m. 2. Abrasion on 2 x 5 c.ms. of left foot 1 x 0.5 c.m. and X-ray reveal the fracture of lower third of left tibia and fibula. The doctor has assessed the disability at 16% of the lower limb and also 16% of the whole body. Anyhow, the Tribunal had an opportunity to observe the injured and it has assessed the disability of the appellant at 8% of the whole body. The doctor has assessed the disability at 16% of the lower limb and also 16% of the whole body. Anyhow, the Tribunal had an opportunity to observe the injured and it has assessed the disability of the appellant at 8% of the whole body. No ground is made out to enhance the same. 9. The Tribunal has considered the income of the appellant at Rs. 3,000/- per month and as the accident it of the year 2007, the income assessed by the Lok Adalat is approximately Rs. 4,500/- per month. Therefore, with this income and disability as assessed by the Tribunal, the net loss of future income would be Rs. 77,760/- (Rs. 4500/- x 12 x 18 x 8/100). Deducting a sum of Rs. 51,840/- granted by the Tribunal, the appellant is entitled to a further sum of Rs. 25,920/- on this head. 10. Only a sum of Rs. 10,000/- is granted towards pain, suffering and mental agony. As the appellant has suffered two fractures, it is just and proper to grant a further sum of Rs. 10,000/- on this head. 11. Though the appellant has produced the bills for a total sum of Rs. 13,968/-, the Tribunal has granted only a sum of Rs. 8,000/- towards medical expenses. I think it is just and proper to grant a further sum of Rs. 6,000/- on this head. 12. The compensation of Rs. 10,000/- granted towards loss of amenities is just proper and no ground is made out to interfere with the same. 13. A sum of Rs. 6,000/- has been granted towards loss of income during the laid up period. Taking into consideration the period of healing the fracture and to resume the normal duties, at Rs. 4,500/- per month for three months, the compensation payable would be Rs. 13,500/-. Deducting a sum of Rs. 6,000/- already granted by the Tribunal, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 7,500/- on this head. 14. A sum of Rs. 3,000/- is granted towards attendant charges, extra nourishment, conveyance charges and travelling expenses. An additional sum of Rs. 2,000/- is payable on this head. Thereby, the appellant is entitled to the compensation as under: 1. Towards loss of future income Rs.25,920/- 2. Towards pain and suffering Rs.10,000/- 3. Towards medical expenses Rs.6,000/- 4. Towards loss of income during the laid up period Rs.7,500/- 5. Towards attendant charge, conveyance etc. An additional sum of Rs. 2,000/- is payable on this head. Thereby, the appellant is entitled to the compensation as under: 1. Towards loss of future income Rs.25,920/- 2. Towards pain and suffering Rs.10,000/- 3. Towards medical expenses Rs.6,000/- 4. Towards loss of income during the laid up period Rs.7,500/- 5. Towards attendant charge, conveyance etc. Rs.2,000/- Total Rs.51,420/- Thus, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 51,420/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. Accordingly, the point is answered in affirmative. Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 51,420/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till its payment, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.