JUDGMENT : 1. In the present appeal, appellant – claimant feeling aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 06.10.2017 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT at Challakere in MVC No.1252/2016 has sought for enhancement of compensation. 2. Brief facts of the case in respect of appellant – Basavaraj in MVC No.1252/2016 is that at 11.02.2016 at 2.00 PM when appellant injured was riding his motor cycle bearing Regn.No.KA16R3728 from Challakere towards Chitradurga along with his wife and child as pillion riders, when he was near Halekallahalli Village Gate, a Maruti Swift Dezire Car bearing Reg.No.KA19MD7371 coming from Chitradurga being driven rashly and negligently dashed appellant’s motor cycle resulting in causing grevious injuries to the appellant all over the body. In this regard, appellant filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.12.00 lakhs. Tribunal on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence on record and after hearing the contentions of the parties, proceeded to grant compensation of Rs.1,81,300/-with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization fixing negligence of 75% and 25% on the driver of the car and appellant herein respectively. 3. Being aggrieved by the judgment award of the Tribunal, appellant has preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation under the head of income, percentage of disability, loss of amenities and recovery. 4. The occurrence, date, time and injuries caused to the appellant in the accident are not in dispute. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that having regard to the profession of the appellant i.e., tractor driver, aged 40 years at the time of accident earning Rs.25,000/-per month, he was the sole bread earner of the family. Having suffered serious injuries in the accident and 47% disability to the limb, injured is unable to do his daily routine work and sought enhancement of compensation. 5. Learned counsel for the insurance company-respondent No.2 supported the judgment and award of the Tribunal and submitted that no interference is called for. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, there is no dispute as regards the occurrence of the accident, injuries suffered by the appellant. 5. Learned counsel for the insurance company-respondent No.2 supported the judgment and award of the Tribunal and submitted that no interference is called for. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, there is no dispute as regards the occurrence of the accident, injuries suffered by the appellant. As regards the monthly income of Rs.25,000/-stated to have been earned by the appellant, except producing one letter head, appellant has not produced any documentary or oral evidence in proof of his income nor has examined the owner of the tractor or employer so as to establish that appellant was drawing sum of Rs.25,000/-per month. Thus, in the absence of proof of income, Lok Adalath guidelines is required to be taken into consideration. Accordingly, for the accident of the year 2016, sum of Rs.9500/-is to be taken as the monthly income of a person who has no proof of income instead of Rs.15,000/-arrived at by the Tribunal as the monthly income of the claimant in the absence of any proof of income. 7. As regards pain and suffering, sum of Rs.15,000/-has been granted by the Tribunal which is meager, Hence, appellant is entitled for Rs.25,000/-towards pain and suffering. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that percentage of disability should have been taken and appropriate compensation should have been awarded whereas global compensation of Rs.1.00 lakh has been awarded. If general principle in respect of percentage of disability is taken into consideration, it should have been 1/3 of 47% would be 16% i.e.47% to the limb and 16% to the whole body. Accordingly, 16% disability is taken into consideration for assessment of compensation. 9. Accordingly, compensation is reassessed as under: (i) Disability (Rs.9500x12x15x16%) Rs. 2,73,600/- (ii) Loss of amenities Rs. 25,000/- (iii) Pain and Sufferings Rs. 25,000/- (iv) Medical expenses Rs. 9,185/- (v) Attendant charges Rs. 10,000/- (vi) Loss of earnings for 6 months @ Rs.9500/pm Rs. 57,000/- (vii) loss of earnings during Treatment period Rs. 7,500/- TOTAL Rs. 4,07,285/- Accordingly, appellant is entitled for Rs.3,05,464/-as compensation after deducting 25% towards contributory negligence to the extent of non production of Driving Licence contributory 10. Hence, the following: ORDER (1) The appeal is disposed of. The judgment and award dated 06.10.2017 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Challakere in MVC No.1252/2016 is modified. 7,500/- TOTAL Rs. 4,07,285/- Accordingly, appellant is entitled for Rs.3,05,464/-as compensation after deducting 25% towards contributory negligence to the extent of non production of Driving Licence contributory 10. Hence, the following: ORDER (1) The appeal is disposed of. The judgment and award dated 06.10.2017 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Challakere in MVC No.1252/2016 is modified. (2) The appellant is entitled for Rs.3,05,464/- as compensation with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. (3) In all other aspects the award of the Tribunal stands.