JUDGMENT : MFA.No.4153/2016 is filed by the KSRTC, whereas MFA.No.1355/2017 is filed by the claimant, assailing the judgment and award dated 5.2.2016, passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACTV, Chitradurga in MVC.No.586/2014. 2. Heard. Appeals are admitted. With the consent of the learned counsel for both parties, they are taken up for final disposal. 3. The accident in question is not in dispute, so also the injuries suffered by the claimant and the involvement of the vehicle in the accident, which is insured with the Corporation. 4. It is the contention of the KSRTC that the disability assessed is on the higher side and even the disability taken by the Tribunal is also on the higher side while calculating the compensation under the head of loss of future income. It is their further contention that the compensation awarded towards pain and suffering, loss of amenities, by taking into consideration the injuries is on the higher side and the same requires to be reduced proportionately in accordance with law. 5. On the other hand, it is the contention of the claimant, i.e., the appellant in MFA.No.1355/2017 that he is an agriculturist and he has sustained injuries to right hip and there is dislocation with femoral head fracture and sciatic nerve injury which affected his future working condition. He also contended that the doctor has assessed disability to the extent of 39.39% for the right hip and knee and the Tribunal by taking 25% of the disability to the whole body has awarded just compensation. He further contended that no compensation has been awarded under the head of loss of income during laid up period and the same requires to be awarded. 6. As could be seen from the impugned judgment and award, the claimant has sustained blunt injury over right thigh hip region tender and swelling; abrasion injury over right knee joint tender and bleeding; lacerated injury over right side chin tender and bleeding. As per the treatment certificate at Ex.P84, it indicates that the claimant has sustained grievous injuries to his right hip posterior, dislocation with femoral head fracture and sciatic nerve injury. He also suffered abrasion over right knee, punctured wound over right leg. He has been treated conservatively and reduction of right hip under sedation. As per the treatment certificate at Ex.P84, it indicates that the claimant has sustained grievous injuries to his right hip posterior, dislocation with femoral head fracture and sciatic nerve injury. He also suffered abrasion over right knee, punctured wound over right leg. He has been treated conservatively and reduction of right hip under sedation. In order to establish the fact that he has also suffered disability, he has produced 78 medical bills as per Ex.P86 to P163 and has also got examined the doctorPW.4 who has deposed that the claimant has suffered from permanent disability to the extent of 39.39% to the right hip and knee. By taking 25% of the disability to whole body, the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.4,37,500/- with interest at 7.5% per annum. 7. Though under normal circumstances, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal appears to be justifiable, at the time of taking disability the Tribunal ought to have considered the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court and could have assessed the disability to the extent of 1/3rd of the disability to a particular limb. If the claimant has suffered disability to the extent of 39.39% for his right hip and knee, then if 1/3rd of the same is taken as disability which comes to 13%. Further, the Tribunal has taken the income of the claimant at Rs.6,000/- per month. Admittedly, the accident is of the year 2013 and at that time, the notional income of Rs.8,000/- per month is the yardstick which is being adopted in LokAdalatfor settlement of cases. If the same is taken into consideration, and disability at 13%, then under such circumstances, the claimant is entitled to Rs.1,74,720/- (8000x12x14x13%) for loss of future income. 8. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering and loss of amenities appears to be on the higher side. The only injury which has been suffered by the claimant is dislocation with femoral head fracture and sciatic nerve injury. In that light, if an amount of Rs.40,000/- towards pain and suffering, and Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities is awarded, it would meet the ends of justice. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards attendant, diet and other incidental charges, and the medical expenses is just and reasonable and hence, the same is kept intact. 9. In that light, if an amount of Rs.40,000/- towards pain and suffering, and Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities is awarded, it would meet the ends of justice. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards attendant, diet and other incidental charges, and the medical expenses is just and reasonable and hence, the same is kept intact. 9. However, the Tribunal has not awarded any amount of compensation for loss of income during laid up period. As the records indicates that the claimant was admitted in the hospital for a period of about 20 days and subsequently, he might have also taken rest. Hence, he is awarded Rs.24,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period. Thus, the claimant in all shall be entitled to Rs.3,37,220/- as against Rs.Rs.4,37,500/- with interest at 7.5% per annum. Accordingly, MFA.No.4153/2016 is allowed-in-part. Impugned judgment and award dated 5.2.2016 passed by the Tribunal in MVC.No.586/2014 is modified to the extent as indicated above. MFA.No.1355/2017 is dismissed as devoid of merits. The amount in deposit if any, may be transmitted to the Tribunal. Award shall be drawn accordingly. KSRTC is directed to deposit the compensation awarded within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.