JUDGMENT : S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J. 1. This appeal by the Insurance Company is directed against the impugned judgment and award passed by the first Additional District Judge & MACT-II, Belagavi (for short 'the Tribunal') in M.V.C. No. 1527/2018 whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation in a sum of Rs.9,85,100/- together with interest at 9% p.a. in favour of the claimant towards injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accident that occurred 24.04.2018. 2. Though the matter is posted under the caption 'hearing on interlocutory application', with the consent of both sides, the appeal is taken up for final disposal. 3. Both counsel submit that the occurrence of the accident and the coverage of the insurance policy of the offending vehicle by the insurance company is not in dispute and the present appeal is restricted to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the insurance company and the learned counsel for the claimant and perused the material on record. 5. Learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the compensation of Rs.5,76,000/- awarded by the Tribunal in favour of the claimant towards loss of future income is highly excessive and exorbitant. In this context, it is contended that the Tribunal committed an error in taking the functional disability to the entire body of the claimant as 30% without appreciating that there was neither legal nor acceptable evidence in this regard. The evidence of the Doctor was not sufficient particularly when he was not the Doctor who treated the claimant and in the absence of grievance injuries and no surgery being done to the claimant who was treated only for five days, the compensation awarded under the aforesaid head deserves to be set aside. So also, the compensation awarded under other heads is excessive and deserves to be reduced by this Court. Further, it is submitted that the interest of 9% awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and the same deserves to be reduced by this Court. So also, the compensation awarded under other heads is excessive and deserves to be reduced by this Court. Further, it is submitted that the interest of 9% awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and the same deserves to be reduced by this Court. Lastly, it is submitted that the total compensation of Rs.9,85,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is excessive in as much as there is a clear error in calculation committed by the Tribunal in the table at paragraph No. 36 of the impugned judgment and award wherein the total compensation is to be held to be Rs.6,70,000/- by correcting the obvious typographical calculation error by modifying the impugned judgment and award accordingly. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would support the impugned judgment and award. 7. A perusal of the impugned judgment and award will indicate that at paragraph 32, the tribunal has taken into consideration the un-impeached evidence of the claimant, the Doctor (PW-6), the medical records and other documents and has recorded a categorical finding of fact by placing reliance upon a decision of the apex Court in order to come to the conclusion that the functional disability to the entire body of the claimant was to an extent of 30% and consequently, he would be entitled to a sum of Rs.5,76,000/- towards loss of future income. After re-appreciating and re-evaluating the entire material on record, I do not find any illegality or perversity in the said finding that deserves interference by this Court. 8. Before proceeding to consider the quantum of compensation under various heads awarded by the Tribunal, it is necessary to modify the impugned judgment and award by correcting the typographical calculation error contained in the table at paragraph 36 of the impugned judgment. As per the said table, the total compensation payable in favour of the claimants on all heads together would come to Rs.6,70,000/- instead of Rs.9,85,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as per the table which is clearly a typographical calculation error. 9. Assuming that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of future income based on functional disability of 30% is on the higher side, it is relevant to note that the Tribunal has taken the notional income of the claimant as Rs.10,000/- per month as against Rs.11,750/- prescribed by the Lok-adalath guidelines since the accident occurred in the year 2018. Assuming that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of future income based on functional disability of 30% is on the higher side, it is relevant to note that the Tribunal has taken the notional income of the claimant as Rs.10,000/- per month as against Rs.11,750/- prescribed by the Lok-adalath guidelines since the accident occurred in the year 2018. Further, the compensation awarded towards pain and suffering is only a meager sum of Rs.20,000/- while the compensation of Rs.20,000/- awarded towards loss of income during laid-up period is also insufficient keeping in mind the Lok-adalath guidelines. Similarly, Rs.20,000/- awarded towards food, nutrition, loss of amenities, etc. is also meager and insufficient in the light of the material on record. Under these circumstances, even assuming that the compensation of Rs.5,76,000/- awarded towards loss of future income is on the higher side, the total compensation of Rs.6,70,000/- to be awarded under all the heads together is definitely just, fair and proper compensation and the same cannot be said to be exorbitant or excessive as sought to be contended by the appellant. Further, having regard to the fact that the accident in question occurred only as recently as on 24.04.2018 coupled with the fact that the compensation under several heads is on the lower side, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the rate of interest at 9% p.a. awarded by the Tribunal also does not deserve to be reduced by this Court. 10. After having re-appreciated and re-evaluated the entire material on record, keeping in mind the principles governing compensation to be awarded in respect of road traffic accidents, I am of the view that except modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by the tribunal by correcting the typographical calculation error and awarding compensation in a sum of Rs.6,70,000/- instead of 9,85,000/- the compensation under various heads awarded by the Tribunal is just, fair and proper and the impugned judgment and award does not warrant interference by this Court in the present appeal. In the result, I pass the following order: ORDER: (i) Appeal is partly allowed. In the result, I pass the following order: ORDER: (i) Appeal is partly allowed. (ii) Impugned judgment and award passed by the tribunal in M.V.C. No. 1527/2018 is hereby modified by awarding a total compensation of Rs.6,70,000/- as against Rs.9,85,000/- awarded by the tribunal in view of the typographical calculation error committed by the tribunal; it is made clear that the compensation awarded under various heads as can be seen in the table at paragraph No.36 of the impugned judgment and award and the rate of interest of 9% p.a. is hereby confirmed. (iii) The amount in deposit is directed to be transferred to the Tribunal for disbursement.