JUDGMENT : N.K. Patil, J. 1. Though this appeal is posted for orders, it is taken up for final disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. This appeal by the claimant is arising out of the impugned judgment and award dated 27-3-2013 passed in MVC No. 1122 of 2011 on the file of the XVI Additional Judge, Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore City, (SCCH-14) (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short). 2. By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 18,44,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization as against the claim of Rs. 75,00,000/- made by the appellant, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident. 3. It is case of the appellant that, he was aged about 36 years as on the date of accident, hale and healthy prior to the accident and a Software Engineer qualified with Diploma in Computer Science and was self-employed doing Software Development to Pharmaceutical Distributors at Mysore and earning more than Rs. 25,000/- p.m. On 13-6-2010, at about 3.30 p.m., the appellant was returning from Golden Grass Restaurant, Mysore after attending the naming ceremony of his friend's son in a Car bearing Registration No. KA-09-MF-1188 belonging to the 1st respondent. When the car reached near Rock Garden Hotel in the Ring Road, Mysore, the driver of the car drove the same in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed and dashed against an electric pole which was by the side of the road. Due to the impact the appellant sustained fracture of cervical bone C1 and C2, injury over brain stem, spinal card and damaged to Vagus nerve and has become unconscious on the spot. Immediately after the accident, he was shifted to Basappa Memorial Hospital, Mysore, where it was found that the appellant had sustained the aforesaid injuries. On the advice of the doctor at Basappa Memorial Hospital, the appellant was shifted to Sagar Hospital, Bangalore, where he was treated as inpatient and an operation was conducted and discharged on 21-7-2010 and then shifted to Jayanagar Orthopedic Center, Bangalore where he was treated as inpatient upto 31-10-2010. On account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the accident, spinal card is damaged which is a permanent disablement. The appellant has spent more than Rs. On account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the accident, spinal card is damaged which is a permanent disablement. The appellant has spent more than Rs. 15,00,000/- towards medical expenses and other incidental charges. Due to the injuries sustained in the said accident, the appellant is totally disabled and is not in a position to sit also and as such he has suffered total loss of earning capacity. For the rest of his life, he has to depend upon the assistance of an attendant. He is the only earning member of the family and all the members were dependent on his income. On account of the grievous injuries caused in the accident, which resulted in the permanent disablement, the appellant cannot work in future thereby suffered loss of income. Further case of the appellant is that, he has spent huge amount for treatment, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. Taking all these factors, he has filed a claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Tribunal claiming compensation against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. To substantiate his case, he examined himself as P.W. 1, Vishwanath as P.W. 2, Dr. S. Venugopal as P.W. 3, Dr. H.V. Madhusudan as P.W. 4, Mrs. Kalpana Joshi as P.W. 5 and P.M. Harish as P.W. 6 and marked documents as Exs. P. 1 to P. 19. Respondents have not got marked any documents. The Tribunal after hearing both sides and after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, has allowed the said claim petition in part and awarded a sum of Rs. 18,44,000/- as compensation under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, so far as it relates to pain and sufferings, loss of amenities, conveyance, Medical expenses, loss of income, Nutritious food and attendant charges, appellant has presented this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation. 4. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent. 5. Sri Ramesh K.R. learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that, the Tribunal has failed to assess the just and reasonable income of the deceased and the income of Rs. 6,500/- per month assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side. 5. Sri Ramesh K.R. learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that, the Tribunal has failed to assess the just and reasonable income of the deceased and the income of Rs. 6,500/- per month assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side. The Tribunal has not considered the income of the deceased properly as he was working as Software Engineer qualified with Diploma in Computer Science, a self-employed person and also doing Software Development to Pharmaceutical Distributors at Mysore and was earning more than Rs. 25,000/- p.m. Further he submitted that on the advice of doctor, he has taken treatment for 6 months and also under gone operation. He has got permanent disability of 100% and he requires help of two attendants. He has to spend money towards future medical expenses and Physiotherapy. The Tribunal has not considered all these aspects nor awarded compensation towards these heads. Therefore, impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified, awarding just and reasonable compensation and also the reasonable rate of interest. 6. Per contra, the learned Counsel Sri A. Niranjana Kumar, appearing for the Insurer inter alia contended and substantiated that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper. It is passed after considering the oral and documentary evidence and interference by this Court is not called for. 7. After considering the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arise for consideration is: "Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?" 8. Occurrence of the accident resulting in the injuries to the appellant is not in dispute. Further it is not in dispute that the appellant was aged about 36 years as on the date of accident and hale and healthy prior to the accident and he is a Software Engineer qualified with Diploma in Computer Science, he was self-employed and was doing Software Development to Pharmaceutical Distributors at Mysore and was earning more than Rs. 25,000/- p.m. But the Tribunal took only Rs. 6,500/- as his income, which is on the lower side. But the appellant has not produced any documents to show his income. 25,000/- p.m. But the Tribunal took only Rs. 6,500/- as his income, which is on the lower side. But the appellant has not produced any documents to show his income. Further, as rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, the income of the appellant assessed by the Tribunal is on lower side and having regard to the age, avocation and year of accident, we can safely reassess the income at Rs. 7,000/- per month, to meet the ends of justice. 9. On account of the aforesaid injuries sustained in the accident, he was under follow up treatment for 6 months. P.Ws. 3 and 4-doctors, after clinical and medical examination has assessed 100% disability to the whole body, but the Tribunal has taken only 50% disability to the whole body. Taking into these aspects into consideration, we can safely reassess 70% disability to the whole body. He might have suffered pain and agony during treatment period. He is not in a position to do the work as he was doing before accident. He has to endure the said difficulty throughout his life. Taking into consideration all these aspects, we deem fit to award Rs. 2,00,000/- towards pain and sufferings as against Rs. 1,00,000/-, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards Food, conveyance and other expenses during treatment period as against Rs. 50,000/-, Rs. 84,000/- towards loss of earnings during treatment period, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of amenities and Rs. 8,82,000/- (Rs. 7,000/- x 12 x 15 x 70/100) towards loss of future earning capacity as against Rs. 5,85,000/-, Rs. 3,00,000/- towards future medical expenses. However, the Tribunal has rightly awarded a sum of Rs. 10,70,000/- towards medical expenses. Therefore, interference by this Court is not called for. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 27-3-2013 passed by the Tribunal in MVC No. 1122 of 2011 is hereby modified. The total compensation payable comes to Rs. 27,36,000/- with 6% interest per annum as against Rs. 18,44,000/- and the break-up is as follows: Towards pain and sufferings Rs. 2,00,000/- Towards medical expenses Rs. 10,70,000/- Towards conveyance, Nutritious food and attendant charges Rs. 1,00,000/- Towards loss of earning during treatment period Rs. 84,000/- Towards loss of amenities Rs. 1,00,000/- Towards loss of future income (Rs. 7,000/-x12x15x70/100) Rs. 8,82,000/- Future medical expenses Rs. 3,00,000/- Total Rs. 18,44,000/- and the break-up is as follows: Towards pain and sufferings Rs. 2,00,000/- Towards medical expenses Rs. 10,70,000/- Towards conveyance, Nutritious food and attendant charges Rs. 1,00,000/- Towards loss of earning during treatment period Rs. 84,000/- Towards loss of amenities Rs. 1,00,000/- Towards loss of future income (Rs. 7,000/-x12x15x70/100) Rs. 8,82,000/- Future medical expenses Rs. 3,00,000/- Total Rs. 27,36,000/- Enhanced compensation comes to Rs. 8,92,000/-. The 2nd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 8,92,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and award. Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 8,92,000/- a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the fixed deposit in any Nationalized/Scheduled/Grameena Bank, in the name of the appellant for a period of ten years and renewable for another five years, with liberty to him to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it. The remaining Rs. 1,92,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of his mother and natural guardian Smt. Puttamma immediately, on deposit by the Insurer. Draw the award, accordingly.