JUDGMENT : K.N. Phaneendra, J. 1. The claimant being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kalaburagi has preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation. There is no dispute whatsoever by the respondent with record to the awarding of compensation by the trial Court and as well as the liability of the respondent- insurance company. The trial Court after going through in detailed has granted the compensation on various heads which are enumerated below:- Towards pain and suffering Rs. 30,000/- Towards medical expenses Rs. 3,88,315/- Towards future income Rs. 5,18,400/- Towards attendant's charges, food and conveyance Rs. 23,000/- Towards loss of amenities and nutrition food Rs. 10,000/- Towards loss of income during the period of treatment Rs. 18,000/- Total Rs. 9,87,715/- Rounded off Rs. 9,88,000/- 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contends that, the trial Court has awarded very meager amount towards the heads, pain and sufferings, future loss of income, attendant charges and loss of amenities and income during the period of treatment. He further submitted that the Court has not at all awarded any compensation towards the future medical expenses and as well as the marriage prospects of the petitioner. He further contends before the court that the trial court has taken the disability at the rate of 40% as against the 60% as stated by the doctor, who has also deposed about the various sufferings of the claimant. He further contended that, though the trial Court has come to the conclusion that, the petitioner has suffered various injuries to head, but awarded a lesser amount of Rs. 30,000/- towards pain and sufferings and consequentially the amenities have also not been granted. Further it is argued that, the petitioner is a I.T.I. Certificate holder, in fact the same was produced before this Court by way of additional documents along with other documents with an application U/o 41 Rule 27 CPC R/w Section 151 of CPC. Therefore, the learned counsel contended that the claimant is more than a coolie worker and he is a skilled labour. Therefore, at least an amount of Rs. 15,000/- has to be taken as his income per month. Therefore, in all the learned counsel submitted that the compensation granted by the trial court is on the lower side. 3. Therefore, the learned counsel contended that the claimant is more than a coolie worker and he is a skilled labour. Therefore, at least an amount of Rs. 15,000/- has to be taken as his income per month. Therefore, in all the learned counsel submitted that the compensation granted by the trial court is on the lower side. 3. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the trial court after considering the entire facts and circumstances and the documentary evidence placed before it, rightly came to the conclusion and awarded compensation which is justifiable and the same is appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, he pleaded for dismissal of the appeal. He also contended that though some of the documents i.e. marks card of the petitioner issued by the Department of Employment and Training, State Board of Examination and also the Karnataka German Technical Training Institute showing that the petitioner has passed the I.T.I. as a Electrician and also as Basic Computer Course are produced before this Court may be accepted, but he strenuously disputed the disability certificate issued by Directorate for the Empowerment of Differently Abled and Senior Citizens, Bangalore in Serial No. 624491 and further three photographs has been produced by the claimant cannot be accepted without evidence. On careful perusal of the above said documents, though the other side has objected those documents have been issued by the Public Authority, whether the Court can rely upon the contents of those documents is the second question, but there is no hurdle for this Court to take those documents on record for the purpose of perusal of the same. Admissions of the documents before the Court is all together different with that of appreciation and relying upon such documents. When these documents were issued by the competent authorities and the competency of the authorities have not been disputed by the other side. We have no hesitation to allow the application subject to the appreciation of the contents of the documents in accordance with law. Therefore, the application filed U/o 41 Rule 27 CPC is hereby allowed and documents are taken on record. For the purpose of easy identification of the documents before this Court are marked as Exhibits A-series. We have no hesitation to allow the application subject to the appreciation of the contents of the documents in accordance with law. Therefore, the application filed U/o 41 Rule 27 CPC is hereby allowed and documents are taken on record. For the purpose of easy identification of the documents before this Court are marked as Exhibits A-series. Provisional National Trade Certificate as A-1, Karnataka German Technical Training Institute, Gulbarga as A-2, and Disability Differently Abled Persons certificate issued the Directorate for the Empowerment of Differently Abled and Senior Citizens as A-3 and Three photographs as A-4 to 6. 4. In the light of the above said submissions of the learned counsel, now we will proceed to consider as to whether the compensation awarded by the trial Court is proper and appropriate, we will go one by one with reference to the compensation awarded by the trial Court as per the table. 5. The trial Court has awarded an amount of Rs. 30,000/- towards pain and sufferings. We have carefully perused the evidence of the doctor who has examined as PW-2 before the trial Court. The doctor has categorically stated that the appellant has suffered serious head injuries and it is specifically stated that the Cognitive Assessment was made with reference to motor speed, verbal fluency, category fluency, verbal working memory, planning, set shifting, verbal comprehension, verbal learning and memory, perceptual gestalt and focal signs, based on NIMHANS Neuropsychological Battery 2004 (Head Injury). The doctor has opined that the neurological disabilities amount to about 60%. Apart from that the documents which are produced before the trial court which marked at Ex.P4 toEx.P18 clearly discloses that the injured has suffered lot of problem to his head and there are lot of problems with reference to lumbar spine and also paraspinal muscle spasm, small avulsion fracture at antero inferior margin of C4 and C5 vertebra. The doctor is also observed on the basis of some of these documents that, straightening of lumbar spine was likely due to paraspinal muscle spasm and it is also stated that C4 and C5 vertebra fracture found at the antero inferior margin. These are all the important aspects that the trial Court has not made assessment while granting compensation towards pain and sufferings. Admittedly, there are two avulsion fractures, though they are minor fractures, but no compensation has been awarded towards pain and sufferings. These are all the important aspects that the trial Court has not made assessment while granting compensation towards pain and sufferings. Admittedly, there are two avulsion fractures, though they are minor fractures, but no compensation has been awarded towards pain and sufferings. Though it may be due to the neurological problem due to head injury nevertheless there are fractures of C4 and C5. Therefore in our opinion, if all a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- is awarded towards pain and sufferings it would meet the ends of justice. 6. Towards future loss of income, the trial Court has only considered an amount of Rs. 6,000/- as income of the petitioner. The additional documents produced before this Court as per A1 and A2, they clearly discloses that a claimant passed the I.T.I. and as well as Basic Computer, he cannot be treated as an ordinary person equated a coolie worker, he can be very well treated as skilled labour. He would have earned more than Rs. 10,000/- per month. In view of the above said two documents, in our opinion an amount of Rs. 10,000/- minimum has to be taken into consideration as monthly income of the petitioner. Though the learned counsel has strenuously contended for relying upon the additional documents produced before the Court as per A3. But he has not disputed the document i.e. I.T.I. Certificate as per Exhibit A1 and the Computer knowledge certificate as per Exhibit A2 which were issued by the competent authorities. Therefore, we can safely rely upon these two documents for the purpose of considering the skill of the petitioner. Therefore, we are of the opinion in view of the documents Exhibits A1 and A2 marked before this Court, the monthly income has to be taken into consideration at Rs. 10,000/-. 7. Further added to the above, apart from the income of Rs. 10,000/-. The learned counsel requested that the disability has to be taken at 75% as per the certificate issued by the Governmental Authority as per Exhibit A3. 10,000/-. 7. Further added to the above, apart from the income of Rs. 10,000/-. The learned counsel requested that the disability has to be taken at 75% as per the certificate issued by the Governmental Authority as per Exhibit A3. In Exhibit A3, of course the Department of Directorate for the Empowerment of Differently Abled and Senior Citizens, Bangalore has stated in the said document that the disability is at 75% but that in the absence of examination of any expert in this regard, it is any difficult for the Court to assess the disability at 75% as against the assessment of the disability by the treated doctor who has given the disability certificate assessing the disability at 60% as on the date of examination of the patient by him. The learned counsel for the respondent is right in submitting that without providing any opportunity to cross examine the person who issued the disability certificate stating that it was 75% it may not be proper on the part of this Court to rely upon that document. Therefore, we are reluctant rely upon the said documents because it is the documents which runs contrary to the experts evidence before the Court and as well as the disability certificate issued by treated doctor. Therefore, we are inclined to accept the percentage of disability as taken by the treated Doctor. Therefore, calculating the income at 10,000/- applying the multiplier at 18 taking disability at 60%. The total compensation towards loss of future income works out to Rs. 12,96,000/-. 8. The trial Court has awarded a sum of Rs. 23,000/- towards attendant's charges, food and conveyance. It is evident from the discharge summary and other materials on record that the claimant was in hospital as in patient for more than 40 days. Therefore in our opinion, the same shall be enhanced to Rs. 50,000/- towards attendant charges, conveyance etc. as against Rs. 23,000/-. 9. Towards loss of amenities, the trial Court has awarded an amount of Rs. 10,000/-. The loss of amenities should always be proportionate with the pain and sufferings. In view of the doctors opinion, he has suffered lot of mental problems after sustaining injuries as even observed by the trial court. On careful perusal of the entire materials on record, even the claimant has to suffered in future throughout his life. 10,000/-. The loss of amenities should always be proportionate with the pain and sufferings. In view of the doctors opinion, he has suffered lot of mental problems after sustaining injuries as even observed by the trial court. On careful perusal of the entire materials on record, even the claimant has to suffered in future throughout his life. There is no future prospects of recovering to the original position by the claimant. Therefore, we are of the opinion, if an amount of Rs. 60,000/- is awarded towards loss of amenities and nutrition food for future it would meet the ends of justice. The trial Court has awarded an amount of Rs. 18,000/- towards loss of income during the laid upon period for a period of three months. In our opinion, when the patient at the initial stages was there in the hospital for more than 40 days, there was no chances of petitioner recouping to do any work at least for a period of six months, he has to take rest for the said period. Therefore, an amount of Rs. 60,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during the period of treatment, considering the six months at least he has to take a rest. 10. Apart from the above, the trial Court has not considered that the petitioner is unmarried man and the photographs marked at Exhibits A4 to A6 shows that there were lot of stitches put to the head of the appellant and there was physical deep dent in the head portion as per the photograph A4. These are all the aspects should have been taken into consideration by the trial court that marriage prospects is also very week. Therefore, we are of the opinion that if we award an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of future marriage prospects, it would meet the ends of justice. An amount of Rs. 50,000/- is awarded towards future medical expenses. 11. Therefore in all the claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 21,04,315/-. On all the above said heads:- Towards pain and suffering Rs. 1,00,000/- Towards medical expenses Rs. 3,88,315/- Towards future income Rs. 12,96,000/- Towards attendant's charges, food and conveyance Rs. 50,000/- Towards loss of amenities and nutrition food Rs. 60,000/- Towards loss of income during the period of treatment Rs. 60,000/- Towards loss of future marriage prospects Rs. 1,00,000/- Towards future medical expenses Rs. 50,000/- Total Rs. 1,00,000/- Towards medical expenses Rs. 3,88,315/- Towards future income Rs. 12,96,000/- Towards attendant's charges, food and conveyance Rs. 50,000/- Towards loss of amenities and nutrition food Rs. 60,000/- Towards loss of income during the period of treatment Rs. 60,000/- Towards loss of future marriage prospects Rs. 1,00,000/- Towards future medical expenses Rs. 50,000/- Total Rs. 21,04,315/- Rounded off Rs. 21,04,000/- 12. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 21,04,000/- along with interest as awarded by the trial Court, as against Rs. 9,88,000/- awarded by the trial Court. Hence, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER: The appeal is partly allowed. The total compensation of Rs. 21,04,000/- is awarded as against Rs. 9,88,000/- awarded by the tribunal along with 6% interest from the date of claim petition till the date of payment. The respondent No. 3 is hereby directed to deposit the difference amount i.e. less the amount already deposited if any before the trial Court within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Otherwise, they have to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum. The rest of the judgment of the trial Court with regard to releasing of the amount is not disturbed.