JUDGMENT : 1. The appeal is of the year 2010. 2. Appellant-Insurance Company has filed the appeal challenging the award passed by MACT Jammu. 3. It is a case of injury. Accident in this case happened on 05.10.2006. Ram Singh aged 22 years was going from Chandigarh to Srinagar in a Truck No. PB7R-1523 and it was hit by offending bus No. JK02V-7875 which was going from Jammu to Pathankot. In that accident, he suffered RTA with fracture shaft of right femur with fracture shaft of left tibia. He was under treatment in Government Medical College Jammu for three months and the disability was assessed at 40% by the Doctor. 4. The Tribunal fixed the income of the injured at Rs. 3000/-and for 40% of disability granted Rs. 14,400/- per annum. After adopting 17 as multiplier following compensation was granted: S. NO. Heads. Award of Tribunal 01. For loss of future income Rs. 216000/- 02. For medical expences/hospitalization Rs. 23,000/- 03. For pain and sufferings Rs. 1,00,000/- 04. For loss of amenities of life Rs. 1,00,000/- Total Rs. 4,39,000/- With interest @ 7.5% per annum. 5. In appeal it is pleaded that the disability of 40% suffered by the injured is only functional disability applicable to only the injured part of the body and in relation to the whole body the disability will be less. Therefore, compensation is on higher side. Moreso, the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is also on higher side. 6. Though plea has been made for reducing the compensation, this Court is not inclined to reduce the same for following reasons: (a) The injured suffered fracture in both the limbs which limits his possibility to work as conductor. Therefore, the earning capacity would considerably be reduced. Tribunal is justified in adopting 15 multiplier in case of disability of 40%. (b) In this case the injured was hospitalized for more than three months. No compensation has been granted for loss of income during the period of treatment. (c) No amount has been granted for attendant charges, extra nutrition, transport charges etc. These are the factors which should be taking into consideration for grant of just compensation. 7. Keeping all this in mind, even assuming that there is marginal higher compensation as pleaded by the appellant, same can be adjusted as above. 8. (c) No amount has been granted for attendant charges, extra nutrition, transport charges etc. These are the factors which should be taking into consideration for grant of just compensation. 7. Keeping all this in mind, even assuming that there is marginal higher compensation as pleaded by the appellant, same can be adjusted as above. 8. The plea raised by the counsel for the appellant-Insurance company that interest cannot be granted on loss of future income is accepted and, therefore, the interest component on all other heads is confirmed except on loss of future income of Rs. 2,16,000/- which is not justified, hence is declined. 9. Appeal to that extent only is allowed.