JUDGMENT : V. SRISHANANDA, J. 1. The appellant/claimant being not satisfied with the judgment and award dated 01.07.2009 passed by the M.A.C.T. No. II Bagalkot (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal” for short) in MVC No. 538/2006 has preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of the appeal is as under: The claimant was a passenger in KSRTC bus bearing No. KA-29/F-493 on 19.07.2006 and was traveling towards Bagalkot from Shirur. It is contended that due to the rash and negligent driving, the driver lost control over the bus and it dashed against the heap of soil on the road side resulting turtling of the bus and the inmates of the bus got injured, one among them is the appellant. Thereafter, she was shifted to Dr. Kanthi’s Nursing Home at Bagalkot. The doctor, who treated the claimant, found that the claimant had simple injury as well as a fracture in 9th rib. It is further contended that the claimant took treatment as an inpatient for a period of four days from 19.07.2006 to 22.07.2006 and because of the said injury, she is unable to carry her day-to-day work. 3. Before the Tribunal, the respondent/ corporation appeared and filed a written statement taking a contention that the injuries sustained by the claimant are on account of negligent attitude attributable to claimant in not taking necessary precaution while sitting in the bus. 4. In order to establish the case of the claimant, she got examined herself as PW-1 before the Tribunal and got marked documentary evidence vide Exs.P.1 to P.9. On behalf of the respondent/corporation, one Shrishail Dandin, got examined as RW-1 but did not place any documentary evidence on record. 5. On cumulative consideration of oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 11,000/- as compensation to the claimant as under: Pain and sufferings Rs. 8,000/- Medical expenditure Rs. 2,600/- Attendants charges and special diet charges Rs. 400/- Total Rs.11,000/- 6. It is the contention of the learned counsel for appellant/claimant that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is too low and meager and sought for enhancement. He specifically contended that the Tribunal has failed to consider the question of loss of amenities and on the head of pain and sufferings has awarded only Rs. 8,000/- which is on lower side. He specifically contended that the Tribunal has failed to consider the question of loss of amenities and on the head of pain and sufferings has awarded only Rs. 8,000/- which is on lower side. He also contended that the claimant being a lady, the Tribunal awarding only an amount of Rs. 400/- towards attendant charges and special diet charges are also on lower side and sought for enhancement. 7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent/corporation vehemently contends that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is a just compensation and requires no interference. 8. Heard the learned counsel for parties and perused the records. 9. On re-appreciation of entire material on record, the sole point that would arise for consideration of this Court is “Whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of the compensation?” 10. On cumulative consideration of oral and documentary evidence the above point is answered in the affirmative for the following: REASONS 11. It is not in dispute that the appellant/ claimant was a passenger in KSRTC Bus bearing No. KA-29/F-493 and the and she suffered injuries as noted in the wound certificate, Ex.P.5 in the road traffic accident that occurred on 19.07.2006. So also, it is not in dispute that she took treatment as an inpatient in Dr. Kanthi’s Nursing Home, Bagalkot from 19.06.2006 to 22.06.2006. 12. The Tribunal observed that even though the doctor, who treated the appellant/claimant is not examined, the wound certificate being not under serious challenge, the injuries sustained by the appellant/claimant stand proved. Pain killers and other medications were administered to the appellant. Hence, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 8,000/- towards pain and sufferings. 13. It is to be noted that the rib fracture may take months together time to cure and having regard to the fact that the claimant was aged about 22 years at the time of the accident, she could have taken couple of months time to cure her fracture. 14. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that awarding of amount of Rs. 8,000/- towards pain and sufferings has to be enhanced reasonably. Thus the Court is of the considered opinion that enhancement of Rs. 4,000/- would be reasonable. 15. Insofar as the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of attendant charges and special diet is concerned, the claimant being a lady, she could have taken assistance of one attendant. 8,000/- towards pain and sufferings has to be enhanced reasonably. Thus the Court is of the considered opinion that enhancement of Rs. 4,000/- would be reasonable. 15. Insofar as the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of attendant charges and special diet is concerned, the claimant being a lady, she could have taken assistance of one attendant. For reunion of her fracture some special diet was necessary for her and therefore, awarding of Rs. 400/- by the Tribunal on that head is too low. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that the same needs to be enhanced by another sum of Rs. 3,000/-. 16. The Tribunal did not award any amount of compensation on the head of loss of amenities. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, this Court is of the considered opinion that awarding of Rs. 5,000/- on the head of loss of amenities by this Court would meet the ends of justice. 17. Accordingly, the point is answered in the affirmative and following order is passed: ORDER: The appeal filed by the claimant is allowed in part. The appellant/clamant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs. 12,000/- over and above the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The judgment and award dated 01.07.2009 passed by the M.A.C.T. No. II Bagalkot in MVC No. 538/2006 is modified accordingly. The respondent/corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.