JUDGMENT : 1. The instant appeal is of the year 2010. 2. The National Insurance Company is on appeal challenging the award dated 30th of April, 2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jammu, primarily, on the quantum of compensation. 3. It is a case of injury. Respondent No. 1-Raj Kumar (hereinafter referred to as ‘claimant’) at the time of accident was 24 years old. On 3rd of May, 2008, claimant-Raj Kumar was proceeding on his Motor, Cycle from Kunjwani towards his home at Manda and when he reached near Petrol Pump, Kalu Chak, National Highway, the alleged offending vehicle bearing Registration No. JK02T-5342 (Tipper), which was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, hit the claimant due to which he sustained shoulder disarticulation right upper limb. 4. The claimant was admitted for a long time in the hospital for his treatment. The disability of the claimant has been assessed by the doctor at 90%. The claimant was a photographer by profession and was earning Rs. 6,000/- Rupees Six Thousand) per month. 5. The Tribunal fixed the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) per month, deducted 50% towards the personal expenses and granted a sum of Rs. 24,80,000/- alongwith interest @ 7.5% per annum by adopting the multiplier of 13 under the following heads:- For the loss of future income Rs. 81,0000/- For Medical and Hospitalization Rs. 169950/- For pain and sufferings Rs. 3,00,000/- For loss of amenities of life Rs. 3,00,000/- Cost of Artificial Limb Rs. 9,00,000/- Total Rs. 24,80,000/- 6. In appeal, it is pleaded that the quantum of compensation is on the higher side, primarily, granted on account of artificial limb. Insofar as other heads are concerned, there is no serious dispute nor does the Insurance Company dispute the interest granted at 7.5% per annum by the Tribunal. 7. So far as the plea for excess amount granted for artificial limb is concerned, the Tribunal held that there is no evidence on record to show that there is requirement of artificial limb. However, the Tribunal has granted Rs. 9,00,000/- towards the cost of artificial limb. This, according, to the Insurance Company is excessive. 8. Learned counsel for the claimant, on the other, hand relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case titled as “Govind Yadav Vs. However, the Tribunal has granted Rs. 9,00,000/- towards the cost of artificial limb. This, according, to the Insurance Company is excessive. 8. Learned counsel for the claimant, on the other, hand relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case titled as “Govind Yadav Vs. The New India Insurance Company Limited, 2012(1) SCC (Cri) 82 whereunder in a case of amputation of the leg of the appellant on 70% disability, Hon’ble Supreme Court was of the view that Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs) will be granted towards the artificial limb, fees for Doctors and ancillary expenses. This is based on the earlier decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case titled as “Nagappa Vs. Gurudayal Singh, (2003) 2 SCC 274 ”. 9. Keeping that in mind the above ruling, the compensation for artificial limb is reduced to Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lacs), which includes cost of medical treatment and ancillary expenses. 10. The amount granted by the Tribunal on other heads is confirmed. 11. In modification of the award of the Tribunal, the claimant is held entitled to compensation as under:- S.No. Heading Award of the Tribunal Modified award 1. For the loss of future income Rs. 8,10,000/- Rs. 8,10,000/- 2. For medical and Hospitalization Rs. 1,69,950/- Rs. 1,69,950/- 3. For pain and sufferings Rs. 3,00,000/- Rs. 3,00,000/- 4. For loss of amenities of life Rs. 3,00,000/- Rs. 3,00,000/- 5. Cost of Artificial Limb (cost of medical treatment and ancillary expenses) Rs. 9,00,000/- Rs. 4,00,000/- Total Rs. 24,80,000/- Rs. 19,79,950/- 12. The Claimant is at liberty to withdraw the amount as above and the appellant-Insurance Company can withdraw the excess in deposit. 13. The appeal is allowed as above.