JUDGMENT : Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent No.3, perused the records. 2. The injured claimant has preferred this appeal, being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in the impugned Judgment dated 26.09.2015, passed by the II Additional District Judge and M.A.C.T., at Chikkamagaluru, made in MVC No. 352/2014, seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. The facts of the case are that on 15.03.2015 at about 9.45 a.m., when the injured claimant was traveling in an auto rickshaw bearing Registration No. KA18/B2078 along with other passengers, the driver of the said auto rickshaw drove the same in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed against the road side tree. Due to the impact, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. 4. After service of notice, the owner of the offending vehicle remained ex-parte before the tribunal. However, the driver and insurer (respondents 1 and 3) appeared before the Tribunal, filed their written statement and contested the claim petition. During the enquiry before the Tribunal, the claimant has established the occurrence of the accident, actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle and its insurance coverage and the same has remained unchallenged either by the owner of the vehicle or by the insurer. 5. The Tribunal, after evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence has held that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle and consequently awarded total compensation of Rs. 73,736/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization under the following heads. Sl. No Headings Amount Rs. 1 Loss of future income (54,000X15X5%) 40,500 2 Medical Expenses 13,236 3 Pain and suffering 15,000 4 Conveyance Allowance 2,000 5 Food and nourishment 3,000 Total 73,736 6. The learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submitted that the Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the injured at Rs. 4,500/- per month to determine the compensation payable towards loss of future income. Further, submits that since the accident was of the year 2015, the tribunal ought to have taken the income of the injured at 9,000/- per month. The compensation awarded by the tribunal towards pain and suffering, conveyance and nourishment are on the lower side. 4,500/- per month to determine the compensation payable towards loss of future income. Further, submits that since the accident was of the year 2015, the tribunal ought to have taken the income of the injured at 9,000/- per month. The compensation awarded by the tribunal towards pain and suffering, conveyance and nourishment are on the lower side. Further, the tribunal erred in not awarding any compensation towards ‘loss of amenities’ and ‘loss of income during the laid up period’ and prays for enhancement in the compensation. 7. Per Contra, Sri. D. Vijay Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the insurer submitted that the Tribunal, on appreciation of the evidence and material on record has rightly assessed the income of the injured and awarded just and fair compensation, which does not call for interference and prays for dismissal of the appeal. 8. On a careful evaluation of the material on record, it is seen that the injured claimant had sustained abrasion on his right knee due to which he sustained fracture of right tibia. According to the doctor PW2, she took treatment for the period from 15.03.2014 to 18.03.2014. The doctor assessed permanent disability sustained by the injured at 20% to her right leg and 10% to the whole body. However, the tribunal assessed the whole body disability at 5%. Having regard to the fact that the accident is of the year 2014, the tribunal was not justified in assessing the income of the injured at Rs. 150/-per day. Interest of justice would be met if the income of the injured is taken at Rs. 9,000/-per month. Thus, the compensation payable towards ‘loss of future income’ would come to Rs.1,20,960/-(9000 x 7000 x 12 x 16/100=1,20,960/-) rounded of to Rs.1,21,000/, as against Rs.40,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal was not justified in not awarding any compensation towards ‘loss of amenities’ and ‘loss of income during treatment period’. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, period of treatment undergone by her and consequential disability sustained by her, it would be just and appropriate to award a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards ‘loss of amenities’ and Rs.18,000/-(Rs.9,000 x 2 =18,000/-) towards ‘loss of income during treatment’. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, period of treatment undergone by her and consequential disability sustained by her, it would be just and appropriate to award a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards ‘loss of amenities’ and Rs.18,000/-(Rs.9,000 x 2 =18,000/-) towards ‘loss of income during treatment’. Further, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards ‘pain and sufferings’ and ‘food and nourishment’ are slightly on the lower side and hence, it would be just and appropriate to award compensation of Rs.35,000/-‘towards pain and sufferings’ as against Rs.15,000/-awarded by the Tribunal and Rs.5000/-‘towards food and nourishment’ as against Rs.3,000/-awarded by the Tribunal. However, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards ‘medical expenses’ and ‘conveyance allowance’ are just and proper and do not call for interference. Thus, in all, the claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.2,04,236/-(Rupees two lakhs four thousand two hundred and thirty six only) as against Rs.73,736/- awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. In modification of the impugned Judgment and award dated 26.09.2015, passed by the II Additional District Judge and M.A.C.T., Chikkamagaluru in M.V.C. No. 352/2014, the compensation payable to the claimant is enhanced from Rs.73,736/- to Rs. 2,04,236/- (Rupees two lakhs four thousand two hundred and thirty six only). The enhanced compensation comes to Rs.1,30,500/- (Rupees one lakh thirty thousand five hundred only). The 3rd respondent-insurer shall deposit the enhanced compensation with interest before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Judgment and on such deposit, the same shall be disbursed to the claimant, on proper identification. However, the impugned judgment and award, in so far as it relates to the rate of interest and deposit is concerned, shall remain unaltered. There shall be no order as to the costs. Office to draw the decree accordingly.