JUDGMENT : N. Kirubakaran, J. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the Transport Corporation as against the award of Rs. 6,65,400/- granted in favour of the respondent/claimant, who sustained injuries in the accident that occurred on 05.06.2009, when the bus, belonging to the appellant Transport Corporation, pushed him down, while standing behind a van in Thiruvallore Avadi Road. 2. The claimant/respondent herein filed the claim petition seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.15 lakhs. On contest, the Tribunal found that the driver of the bus, belonging to the appellant Corporation, was rash and negligent and awarded a sum of Rs.6,65,400/- together with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The said award is being challenged before this Court on the question of quantum alone. 3. Heard Mr. S. Sivakumar, learned counsel for the appellant. 4. On a perusal of the records, it is evident that the accident had occurred because of the rash and negligent driving of the bus as the Tribunal has given a finding based on the filing of FIR, Ex-P1, against the driver of the bus. Moreover, P.W.1, the injured claimant, gave evidence about the accident cogently. However, it was repudiated by R.W.1, the Investigator of the appellant Corporation. But, the Tribunal, rejected the evidence of R.W.1 on the ground that he was not an eye-witness to the accident. Taking into consideration, the filing of FIR against the driver of the appellant Corporation bus and the sustaining of injuries by the respondent/claimant, the Tribunal rightly held that the driver of the appellant Corporation bus was responsible for the accident. 5. Though much has been argued on the question of quantum, it is to be noted that the victim was 19 years old at the time of accident. He suffered crush injuries on his left hand, which resulted in amputation of index finger, middle finger, ring finger and little finger of the left hand. The claimant was treated as an in-patient from 05.06.2009 to 01.07.2009 for about 26 days, as evident from Ex-P2, Discharge Summary. Though Ex-P4, Disability Certificate, speaks about 50% disability, the Tribunal fixed the percentage of disability as 40%, based on the Workmen's Compensation Act. The said determination cannot be found fault with. 6. The claimant was treated as an in-patient from 05.06.2009 to 01.07.2009 for about 26 days, as evident from Ex-P2, Discharge Summary. Though Ex-P4, Disability Certificate, speaks about 50% disability, the Tribunal fixed the percentage of disability as 40%, based on the Workmen's Compensation Act. The said determination cannot be found fault with. 6. Though it was claimed by the claimant that as a Salesman, he was earning Rs.8000/- per month, no proof was available in support of the said claim. Hence, the Tribunal, fixed the monthly income of the respondent/claimant at Rs.6000/-. However, the learned counsel for the appellant would argue strenuously that in the absence of any proof regarding the income of the respondent, even this fixation of Rs.6000/- per month is on the higher side. 7. The Honourable Apex Court, in the judgment reported in 2014 (1) TNMAC 459 Syed Sadiq v. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.), in the absence of any proof, determined the monthly income of the victim in the said case, who sustained injuries in the accident, that occurred on 14.02.2008, at Rs.6500/-, whereas, in this case, the date of accident is 05.06.2009 and though the Tribunal has fixed the monthly income at Rs.6000/-, lower than that fixed by the Honourable Apex Court, in the above cited case, the said determination is confirmed as it is reasonable. 8. At the time of accident, the respondent/claimant was aged 19 years. As per the judgment of the Honourable Apex Court in Sarla Verma's case, future prospects will have to be taken into consideration and in case of victims, aged below 40 years, 50% of monthly income will have to be added towards future prospects. In that event, the loss of income would be (Rs.6000 + 50% (Rs.6000)), which comes to Rs.9000/- per month. 9. As stated already, the medical records prove that the claimant sustained crush injuries leading to amputation of 4 fingers on his left hand, that too, at the age of 19 years. Though the Doctor, who was examined as P.W.2, had assessed the disability at 50%, the Tribunal had taken the percentage of disability at 40%, based on the Workmen's Compensation Act. The said assessment requires no interference and the same is confirmed. 10. With the loss of four fingers, the claimant would not be in a position to do any work at all. The said assessment requires no interference and the same is confirmed. 10. With the loss of four fingers, the claimant would not be in a position to do any work at all. Though the disability is assessed at 40%, considering the fact that the said disability will lead to loss of income and considering the age of the injured, the Tribunal rightly adopted multiplier method. As per Smt. Sarla Verma and Others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 , the appropriate multiplier is 18. Hence, applying the said multiplier, taking loss of income as Rs.9000/- per month and disability at 40%, loss of earning power is calculated as hereunder: Loss of earning power :: 9000 x 12 x 18 x 40% :: Rs. 7,77,600/- 11. Since the claimant was hospitalised for 26 days, for loss of income during treatment period and also during follow-up, a sum of Rs.36,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal and a sum of Rs.10,000/- was awarded towards "Transportation Expenses", which are confirmed. As far as the sum of Rs.10,000/- awarded towards "Extra Nourishment" is concerned, the same is enhanced to Rs.30,000/-. Further, a sum of Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards "Attender Charges" as the claimant took treatment as an in-patient for 26 days. 12. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.50,000/- towards "Mental Agony" and Rs.30,000/- towards "Pain and Suffering". Since both the heads are more or less the same, the amount of Rs.30,000/- awarded towards "Pain and Suffering" is deleted and the amount awarded under "Mental Agony" is sustained. The amount awarded towards "Medical Expenses", to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- and Rs.1000/-awarded towards "Damage to Clothes" stand confirmed. 13. The respondent/claimant lost all four fingers on his left hand at the age of 19 years, on account of the accident in question, thereby causing, not only disfigurement, but also his marital prospects bleak. But, this aspect was not considered by the Tribunal. Hence, towards "Loss of Marital Prospects", this Court is inclined to grant a sum of Rs.75,000/- to the respondent/claimant. 14. In the result, the total compensation payable to the claimant works out to: Loss of Earning Power Rs.7,77,600/- Loss of Income for 6 months during treatment Rs. 36,000/- Transportation Expenses Rs. 10,000/- Extra Nourishment Rs. 30,000/- Attender Charges Rs. 10,000/- Mental Agony Rs. 50,000/- Medical Expenses Rs. 10,000/- Damage to Clothes Rs. 1,000/- Loss of Marital Prospects Rs. 14. In the result, the total compensation payable to the claimant works out to: Loss of Earning Power Rs.7,77,600/- Loss of Income for 6 months during treatment Rs. 36,000/- Transportation Expenses Rs. 10,000/- Extra Nourishment Rs. 30,000/- Attender Charges Rs. 10,000/- Mental Agony Rs. 50,000/- Medical Expenses Rs. 10,000/- Damage to Clothes Rs. 1,000/- Loss of Marital Prospects Rs. 75,000/- Total Compensation Rs. 9,99,600/- Rounded off to: Rs.10,00,000/- The rate of interest, as ordered by the Tribunal, is confirmed. 15. Though the Transport Corporation has filed the appeal as against the award of Rs.6,66,400/-, this Court is dismissing the appeal at the admission stage itself, enhancing the compensation to Rs.10,00,000/-. There is no necessity for notice to the claimant as the claimant is only going to be benefited by enhancement of the compensation and he is not going to be prejudiced. Only when the interest of the opposite party is likely to get affected, notice is necessary. Hence, there is no question of violation of principles of natural justice. 16. In an endeavour to do complete justice, this Court has enhanced the compensation payable to the claimant in the appeal filed by the Transport Corporation and this Court has got power and jurisdiction to do so, in view of Order 41, Rule 33 CPC and also Article 227 of the Constitution of India. That apart, appeal is continuation of the original proceedings and therefore, this Court is bound to re-appreciate the pleadings and evidence on record and what is required to be awarded is just compensation. As stated above, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is not just and adequate compensation and hence, the same is enhanced. 17. The appellant Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest before the Tribunal, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal shall pay the said amount to the respondent/claimant within two weeks thereafter. No costs. Connected M.P. is closed.