JUDGMENT : N.K. Patil, J. This appeal by the claimant is directed against impugned judgment and award dated 27-5-2014 passed in MVC No. 1155/2011 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Additional MACT, Udupi (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal for short) for enhancement of compensation. 2. The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,44,600/- with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization, on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the road traffic accident. He has presented this appeal on the ground that the quantum of compensation and rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and it requires enhancement. 3. The brief facts of the case on hand are : The appellant claims that he was aged about 50 years at the time of the accident, hale and healthy, working as coolie, earning a sum of Rs. 9,000/- per month. That on 3-4-2011, at about 4.30 p.m., when he was riding a Motor Cycle bearing No. KA 20-K.-9788 from Padubidri side towards Uchhila side on NH-66, when the motor cycle reached near Kalyani Bar of Badayermal Village, at that time, one State Carriage Vehicle bearing Reg. No. KA-01-AA-3317 came from Mangalore side and without keeping minimum distance, the bus driver drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the appellants Bike from its hind portion. As a result, he fell down and sustained closed head injury with right optic nerve injury, fracture of right side forearm bone with fracture of left cheek bone, and referred them as grievous injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Adarsha Hospital, where he took treatment as inpatient till 29-4-2011. Further, he was shifted to Highland Hospital, Mangalore where he took treatment from 16-5-2011 to 23-5-2011 and thereafter, he was shifted to A.J. Hospital, Mangalore where he was in patient from 9-6-2011 to 6-7-2011. Totally, he was treated as inpatient for 81 days. Because of the injuries sustained, he has been permanently disabled and he has sustained 94% physical disability to the right upper limb and 30% to the whole body, and he has 100% loss on right side of the shoulder and elbow, wrist and 80% of loss of muscle in the region. Totally, he was treated as inpatient for 81 days. Because of the injuries sustained, he has been permanently disabled and he has sustained 94% physical disability to the right upper limb and 30% to the whole body, and he has 100% loss on right side of the shoulder and elbow, wrist and 80% of loss of muscle in the region. Therefore, the appellant was constrained to file a claim petition under Section 166 of MV Act, before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs. 19,52,150/-. 4. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing both sides and after assessing the oral and documentary evidence, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded a compensation of Rs. 4,44,600/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation and rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation. 5. Sri Pratheep K.C., learned counsel for the appellant, at the outset, submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation under the heads of pain and suffering, loss of income during the laid-up period and loss of earning capacity, since the appellant has sustained grievous injuries, further, the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards future medical expenses. The Tribunal has also erred in not assessing reasonable income of the appellant as he was a coolie by profession and earning a sum of Rs. 9,000/- per month. Therefore, the income of the claimant may be re-assessed between Rs. 6,500/- and 7,500/- p.m. The Tribunal has not considered the evidence of PW1-Doctor, who opined that the appellant has sustained 94% physical disability to the right upper limb and 30% to the whole body, and he has 100% loss on right side of the shoulder and elbow, wrist and 80% of loss of muscle in the region and also erred in awarding only Rs. 30,000/- towards loss of amenities. He has spent huge amount towards medical expenses, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges etc. But, the Tribunal without considering the material on record, has awarded a meager compensation of Rs. 4,44,600/-. Further, the Tribunal has also erred in awarding 8% interest p.a. even though the accident is of the year 2011. 30,000/- towards loss of amenities. He has spent huge amount towards medical expenses, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges etc. But, the Tribunal without considering the material on record, has awarded a meager compensation of Rs. 4,44,600/-. Further, the Tribunal has also erred in awarding 8% interest p.a. even though the accident is of the year 2011. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified by enhancing just an reasonable compensation and also rate of interest. 6. As against this, Sri. S.V. Hegde Mulkhand, learned counsel appearing for 2nd respondent-insurer, inter alia contended and sought to substantiate that the impugned judgment and award has been passed by the Tribunal after due consideration of the oral and documentary evidence and hence, interference by this Court is not called for. 7. After careful consideration of 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 arises for consideration is : "Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable." 8. The injuries sustained in the road traffic accident that occurred on 3-4-2011, at about 4.30 p.m. are not disputed. It is further not in dispute that the appellant took treatment for 81 days as inpatrient at different hospitals. Due to the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident, he has suffered pain and mental agony and also discomfort and unhappiness during the treatment period. PW1-Doctor who treated the appellant has stated in his evidence that he has sustained 94% physical disability in the right upper limb and 30% to the whole body, and he has 100% loss on right side of the shoulder and elbow, wrist and 80% of loss of muscle in the region. Because of the said disability, he needs the assistance of the attendant throughout his life and moreover he is suffering from poor mental balance. Having regard to the age, avocation and year of the accident, we can safely re-assess the income of the appellant at Rs. 6,500/- per month. Taking into consideration all these aspects and after re-appreciation of the material on record, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards pain and agony as against Rs. 1,10,000/-, Rs. Having regard to the age, avocation and year of the accident, we can safely re-assess the income of the appellant at Rs. 6,500/- per month. Taking into consideration all these aspects and after re-appreciation of the material on record, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards pain and agony as against Rs. 1,10,000/-, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of amenities and disability as against Rs. 30,000/-, Rs. 50,000/- towards attendant, nourishing food and conveyance charges as against Rs. 20,000/-. Rs. 3,04,200/- (Rs. 6,500/- x 12 x 13 x 30/100) towards loss of earning capacity as against Rs. 1,17,000/-. Rs. 39,000/- towards loss of income during the laid-up period for six months as against Rs. 30,000/-. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards future medical expenses. After re-appreciating the other material on record and also taking into consideration the evidence of the doctor, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards future medical expenses. 9. The Tribunal has rightly awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,37,600/- towards medical expenses, hence, interference by this Court is not called for. 10. In the light of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant is entitled to a total compensation under different heads on account of injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accident, the break up of which is as follows : 1. Pain & Suffering Rs. 1,50,000/- 2. Medical Expenses Rs. 1,37,600/- 3. Conveyance, Nourishment and Attendant charges Rs. 50,000/- 4. Loss of amenities due to disability Rs. 1,00,000/- 5. Loss of income during laid-up period for five months Rs. 39,000/- 6. Loss of earning capacity Rs. 3,04,200/- 7. Future medical expenses Rs. 1,50,000/- Total Rs. 9,30,800/- 11. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 9,30,800/- as against Rs. 4,44,600/- awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, there would be enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,86,200/-. Further, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for appellant, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable interest. Since the accident is of the year 2011, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court and this Court in catena of judgments, we deem it proper to award 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till realisation on the enhanced compensation. 12. For the forgoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. 13. 12. For the forgoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. 13. The judgment and award dated 27-5-2014 passed in MVC No. 1155/2011 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Additional MACT, Udupi, is hereby modified, awarding additional compensation of Rs. 4,86,200/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. 14. The respondent No. 2-insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,86,200/- with interest at 9% 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. 15. Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,86,200/-, Rs. 3,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of appellant in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized/Scheduled Bank/Grameena Bank for a period of five years and renewable for five years, with liberty to him to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically. 16. Remaining amount of Rs. 1,86,200/- with interest shall be released in favour of the appellant immediately on deposit made by the second respondent/insurer. 17. Draw the award, accordingly.