JUDGMENT : 1. It is not in dispute that an accident occurred on 16.08.2009 when two wheeler being driven by the claimant was hit from behind by a car. 2. As a result of the accident, the claimant suffered grievous injuries including a head injury and he thereafter filed a claim petition seeking for compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-. 3. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident did occur due to the rash and negligent driving of the car and the claimant had suffered injuries. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/-towards “pain and agony”; a sum of Rs.1,04,617/- towards “medical expenses”; and also granted 6% interest on the said amount from the date of petition fill the date of realization. 4. However, the Tribunal did not grant any compensation towards loss of future income or under any other heads relating to the disability of the claimant on the ground that the Doctor was not examined and there was no evidence to show that there was permanent disability. 5. On 07.03.2022, when the matter was taken up for hearing, it was noticed that during the proceedings before the Tribunal, a Commissioner had been appointed to examine the Doctor, but the Doctor did not permit the Commissioner to examine him. 6. In this appeal, the appellant had filed an application seeking to produce a certificate issued by Dr. S.P. Baligar. In order to ascertain the actual disability, Dr. S.P. Baligar was directed to examine the claimant afresh and furnish a certificate regarding the claimant’s disability to this Court. The said order was communicated to Dr. S.P. Baligar through the counsel for the Insurance Company. 7. Pursuant to the said order, Dr. S.P. Baligar has furnished the certificate through the counsel for the Insurance Company. The said certificate reads as follows: “CERTIFICATE Sri Manjunath Bellary, 23/M on 16/8/2009 met with an accident. RTA. He had brain hemorrhage. He was treated and was discharged on 10-9-2009. He was not fully improved. He has decreased memory, dullness, swaying while walking. He is not able to do any work. His C.T. Scan also shows damage in his both frontal and temporal lobes. He has 50% disability. Sd/- Seal” 8. As could be seen from the certificate, Dr. S.P. Baligar has opined that the claimant has not fully improved and he has decreased memory, dullness, swaying while walking and is not able to do any work. His C.T. Scan also shows damage in his both frontal and temporal lobes. He has 50% disability. Sd/- Seal” 8. As could be seen from the certificate, Dr. S.P. Baligar has opined that the claimant has not fully improved and he has decreased memory, dullness, swaying while walking and is not able to do any work. He has also stated that his C.T. Scan report shows the damage to his both frontal and temporal lobes and he has 50% disability. 9. In view of this certificate, it is clear that the claimant had decreased memory, dullness and swaying while walking and is not able to do any work since he cannot do any work, it will have to be held that the claimant has suffered 100% functional disability. 10. There is no documentary evidence to establish the actual income of the claimant and hence, the monthly income determined by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority for the relevant year will have to be adopted, which would be a sum of Rs.5,000/-. 11. To this amount, future prospects of 40% will have to be added, which would result in the monthly income of the claimant at Rs.7,000/-(Rs.5,000/-+ 40%). 12. As on the date of accident, the claimant was aged about 27 years and hence a multiplier of 18 would be applicable. 13. Thus, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.15,12,000/-(Rs.7,000/-x 12 x 18) towards loss of future income. 14. The compensation of Rs.1,04,617/- awarded by Tribunal towards “medical expenses” being based on the documentary evidence, the same required to be maintained. 15. The compensation of Rs.30,000/-awarded by the Tribunal towards “pain and agony” is on the lower side. In my view, having regard to the fact that even after 13 years, the claimant is unable to do any work and has reduced memory and sways while walking, he would be entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-under the said head. 16. Thus, the claimant would be entitled to the following sums as compensation: 1. Loss of future income Rs.15,12,000/- 2. Medical expenses Rs.1,04,617/- 3. Pain and Agony Rs.1,00,000/- TOTAL Rs.17,16,617/- 17. 16. Thus, the claimant would be entitled to the following sums as compensation: 1. Loss of future income Rs.15,12,000/- 2. Medical expenses Rs.1,04,617/- 3. Pain and Agony Rs.1,00,000/- TOTAL Rs.17,16,617/- 17. Though the claimant had claimed only Rs.6,00,000/-in the claim petition, having regard to the fact that the claim was made in the year 2011 and even after lapse of 13 years, the claimant is unable to do any work as per the opinion of the Doctor, the amount claimed by the claimant in his claim petition cannot be a limiting factor to award compensation. 18. In my view, in an appropriate case, the Court is obliged to award compensation which is just and proper and which would subserve the interest of justice. Therefore, notwithstanding the claim of Rs.6,00,000/-made by the claimant in the claim petition, the claimant would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.17,16,617/-instead of Rs.1,34,617/-awarded by the Tribunal. 19. The said sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. 20. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimant is allowed in part. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified. 21. The respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount along with interest before the Tribunal for disbursement excluding the amount in deposit, if any.