JUDGMENT : This appeal has been filed by the claimant in OP(MV) No.1579 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam. The respondents herein are the respondents before the tribunal. 2. The case of the appellant/claimant is that on 10.04.2012, while she was walking along Tripunithura Hospital Road towards the hospital, a bus bearing Reg.No.KL-7-AN-6762 driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit the appellant, whereby she sustained serious injuries. She approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of Rs.6,60,000/-. 3. Respondents 1 and 2 remained ex parte before the tribunal. The third respondent insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy coverage for the offending vehicle, but disputing the liability and quantum of compensation claimed. Before the tribunal, Exts.A1 to A16 were marked on the side of the appellant/claimant. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. Ext.X1 was marked as court exhibit. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, held that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle and awarded a sum of Rs.5,41,910/- as compensation under different heads against the third respondent, being the insurer. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimant has come up in appeal. 4. I have heard Smt.Manasi, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.S.Arun Raj, the learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent insurer. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant claims enhancement mainly under the following heads; Notional income - The learned counsel for the appellant submits that though the appellant, a helper-mason, was earning Rs.7,000/- per month, the tribunal has fixed the notional monthly income at Rs.4,000/-. It is further submitted that, as per the decision in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. [ (2011) 13 SCC 236 ], the notional monthly income of the appellant ought to have been fixed at Rs.8500/-. I find force in the argument. Following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra), I deem it appropriate to re-fix the notional monthly income of the appellant at Rs.8500/-. Loss of earnings - Since the monthly income of the appellant is refixed at Rs.8,500/-, compensation towards loss of earnings for a period of 8 months has to be recalculated, which would come to Rs.68,000/- (Rs.8,500/- x 8). Following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra), I deem it appropriate to re-fix the notional monthly income of the appellant at Rs.8500/-. Loss of earnings - Since the monthly income of the appellant is refixed at Rs.8,500/-, compensation towards loss of earnings for a period of 8 months has to be recalculated, which would come to Rs.68,000/- (Rs.8,500/- x 8). Thus, the appellant will be entitled to get an additional compensation of Rs.36,000/- towards loss of earnings after deducting the compensation of Rs.32,000/- awarded by the tribunal. Loss of earning capacity/personal or permanent disability - Since the monthly income of the appellant is refixed at Rs.8,500/-, compensation towards personal or permanent disability has to be recalculated. Thus, following the judgments in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [ 2017 (4) KLT 662 (SC)] and Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation [ 2010 (2) KLT 802 (SC)], the appellant will be entitled to get a total compensation of Rs.1,59,120/- (8500 x 12 x 12% x 13) towards personal or permanent disability. The tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.74,850/-. Hence, there will be an additional amount of Rs.84,270/- under the head personal/permanent disability. On a perusal of the impugned award, it is seen that the tribunal has granted compensation for both loss of earning capacity and permanent disability, resulting in double compensation. Hence, I am inclined to delete the compensation awarded towards loss of earning capacity. Accordingly, the compensation of Rs.75,000/- awarded towards loss of earning capacity is deleted. Attendant expenses - The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the tribunal had granted only an amount of Rs.19,000/- as the attendant expenses, taking Rs.250/- per day for 76 days, which is on the lower side. Considering the nature of injuries sustained and the year of accident, I am inclined to take Rs.350/- per day as the attendant expenses. Accordingly, the total compensation payable under the above head is re-calculated thus: Rs.26,600/- (Rs.350/- x 76). Thus there will be an additional amount of Rs.7,600/- (Rupees Seven Thousand Six Hundred Only) under the afore head. Loss of amenities - Considering the injuries sustained by the appellant, i.e. circumferential degloving injury to left leg and foot with heel pad avulsion, and the sufferings that the appellant might have undergone, I deem it appropriate to award a total compensation of Rs.1,25,000/- towards loss of amenities. Loss of amenities - Considering the injuries sustained by the appellant, i.e. circumferential degloving injury to left leg and foot with heel pad avulsion, and the sufferings that the appellant might have undergone, I deem it appropriate to award a total compensation of Rs.1,25,000/- towards loss of amenities. The tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.50,000/-, Thus, the appellant will be entitled to get an additional amount of Rs.75,000/- towards loss of amenities. Pain and suffering - Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the tribunal awarded only an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- under the above head. It is seen that the appellant was hospitalized for a period of 76 days and had to continue treatment further on account of the injuries sustained in the accident. Considering the injuries sustained by her, I am inclined to grant an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- to the appellant as total compensation towards pain and suffering. Thus, the appellant will be entitled to get an additional amount of Rs.25,000/- as compensation towards pain and suffering. Though the appellant claimed enhancement of compensation under other heads, on a perusal of the records available, I am not inclined to interfere with the compensation awarded by the tribunal under other heads since it appears to be just and reasonable. Thus, the impugned award of the tribunal is modified as follows; Sl. No. Head of Claim Amount claimed (in Rs.) Amount awarded by the tribunal (in Rs.) Modified in appeal (in Rs.) Total compensation (in Rs.) 1. Compensation for actual loss of income - 32000 36000 68000 2. Transport to hospital & back home 1000 5000 - 5000 3. Extra nourishment 8000 8000 - 8000 4. Damage to clothing and articles 1000 1000 - 1000 5. Medical Expenses 220000 177059 - 177059 6. Future treatment expenses 30000 - - - 7. Attendant expenses 20000 19000 7600 26600 8. Compensation for loss of earning capacity 0 75000 -75000 - 9. Actual loss of earning power 130000 0 - - 10. Compensation for pain and suffering 60000 100000 25000 125000 11. Compensation for personal disability 150000 74850 84270 159120 12. Compensation for loss of amenities 40000 50000 75000 125000 Total 660000 541909 152870 694779 Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellant/claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs. Actual loss of earning power 130000 0 - - 10. Compensation for pain and suffering 60000 100000 25000 125000 11. Compensation for personal disability 150000 74850 84270 159120 12. Compensation for loss of amenities 40000 50000 75000 125000 Total 660000 541909 152870 694779 Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellant/claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs. 1,52,870/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Two Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy only) over and above the compensation awarded by the tribunal with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate costs. The respondent insurer shall deposit the said amount together with interest and costs within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The claimant shall furnish copies of the PAN Card, AADHAAR Card and bank details before the third respondent insurer within a period of one month so as to enable the insurance company to make the deposit as ordered above. In case of failure to furnish details as above, it shall be open for the insurance company to deposit the said amount before the tribunal. Upon such deposit being made, the entire amount shall be disbursed to the appellant at the earliest in accordance with law.