JUDGMENT : Shoba Annamma Eapen, J. This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant in O.P (MV) No.686 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala. The respondent herein is the 2 nd respondent before the tribunal. 2. According to the appellant/claimant, on 24.10.2010 at about 04.40 pm, while the petitioner was riding pillion on a motorcycle bearing registration KL-36-A-8622 ridden by the 1 st respondent. The 1 st respondent suddenly turned the motorcycle to the right side as a result of which the petitioner fell down and sustained serious injuries. The appellant approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of Rs.4,51,000/- limited to Rs.3,00,000/-. 3. Before the tribunal, the 1 st respondent remained ex parte. The 2 nd respondent-insurer, admitting the policy, but disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. Before the tribunal, PWs 1 to 3 were examined on the side of the petitioner and documentary evidence of Exts.A1 to A13 were marked on the side of the petitioner. Ext.X1 was marked as court exhibits. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a sum of Rs.1,03,850/- as compensation under different heads with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization with proportionate costs from respondent-insurers. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimant has come up in appeal. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurance company. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant claims enhancement mainly under the following heads :- Notional income :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant was a building contractor at the time of the accident. The insurer submitted that no document was produced to prove the income nor the avocation. On a perusal of the award, it is seen that the claimant himself was examined as PW1. I have gone through the certified copy of the deposition, which was handed over to me by the learned counsel for the appellant. On a perusal of the same, he has stated that he was a building contractor at the time of the accident and was earning an amount of Rs.25,000. However no other supporting evidence was produced. Considering the above facts, I find that as per the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. On a perusal of the same, he has stated that he was a building contractor at the time of the accident and was earning an amount of Rs.25,000. However no other supporting evidence was produced. Considering the above facts, I find that as per the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. [ 2011 (13) SCC 236 ], the monthly income of a coolie ought to have been taken as Rs.7,500/-. Considering the facts of this case, I deem it appropriate to refix the monthly income at Rs.8,500/-. Loss of earnings :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that towards the head loss of earnings, the tribunal has taken only a period of three months for awarding compensation. The learned counsel submitted that due to the injuries sustained, the appellant could not go for any work for more than eight months. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, I find that a period of six months can be taken for awarding compensation under the afore head. Since the notional monthly income is refixed at Rs.8,500/-, the total compensation payable under the head is recalculated thus: Rs.51,000/- (8,500x6). The tribunal has already awarded an amount of Rs.15,000/- under the said head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of Rs.36,000/- under the head loss of earnings. Bystander expenses :- The tribunal has taken only an amount of Rs.200/- per day for a period of 35 days. Considering the fact that the accident occurred in the year 2010, I find that an amount Rs.250/- per day would be just and reasonable and, thus the total compensation will come to Rs.8,750/-. The tribunal has already awarded an amount of Rs.7,000/- under the said head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of Rs.1,750/- under the head bystander expenses. Pain and sufferings :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that an amount of Rs.50,000/- was claimed towards the head pain and sufferings, the tribunal has awarded only an amount of Rs.20,000/-. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, I find that a total amount of Rs.40,000/- can be awarded under the head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of Rs.20,000/ - under the afore head. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, I find that a total amount of Rs.40,000/- can be awarded under the head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of Rs.20,000/ - under the afore head. Loss of amenities :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though an amount of Rs.50,000/- was claimed towards the head loss of amenities, the tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the afore head. Considering the nature of injuries sustained as well as age of the appellant, I find that an amount of Rs.40,000/ - can be awarded under the afore head. Compensation for disability :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that, as per Ext.X1 disability certificate, the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam has assessed the permanent physical disability of the appellant at 20%. However, the tribunal has reduced the percentage of disability to 2%. This reasoning of the tribunal does not appear to be acceptable in view of the judgments of this Court in Manikantan G. v. K.Janardhanan Nair [ 2021(5) KHC 305 ] and Rajkumar v. Ajay Kumar [2011 (1) KLT 620 SC]. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to fix the percentage of disability at 20% as assessed in Ext.X1 disability certificate, for the purpose of calculating compensation. Since the monthly income is refixed at Rs.8,500/-, the compensation payable under the head is recalculated thus: Rs.2,65,200/- (8,500 x 12 x 13 x 20/100). The tribunal has already awarded an amount of Rs.15,600/- under the head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of Rs.2,49,600/- under the head compensation for permanent disability. 6. Though the appellant claimed enhancement of compensation under the 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. 7. Thus, the impugned award of the tribunal is modified as follows:- Sl. 6. Though the appellant claimed enhancement of compensation under the 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. 7. Thus, the impugned award of the tribunal is modified as follows:- Sl. No Head of Claim Amount claimed Amount awarded by the tribunal Modified in appeal Total compensation 1 Loss of earnings 1,25,000 15,000 36,000 51,000 2 Transport to hospital 10,000 2,000 (not modified) 2,000 3 Extra nourishment 5,000 1,000 (not modified) 1,000 4 Damage to clothing 1,000 Nil Nil Nil 5 Treatment expenses 50,000 43,250 (not modified) 43,250 6 Bystander expenses 10,000 7,000 1,750 8,750 7 Pain and sufferings 50,000 20,000 20,000 40,000 8 Permanent disability 1,50,000 15,600 2,49,600 2,65,200 9 Loss of amenities 50,000 Nil 40,000 40,000 TOTAL 4,51,000 limited to 3,00,000 1,03,850 3,47,350 4,51,200 Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellant/claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.3,47,350/- (Rupees three lakhs forty seven thousand three hundred and fifty only) over and above the compensation awarded by the tribunal with interest @7.5% 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, ADHAAR Card and bank details before the 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. However, it is made clear that the enhanced compensation will not carry interest for the period of delay of 131 days in filing the appeal.