JUDGMENT : This appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant represented by her legal heir in OP(MV) No.1431 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor. The respondents herein are the respondents before the Tribunal. 2. According to the petitioner, on 08.01.2006 at 12.45 a.m., while the appellant/injured along with her parents were travelling in a car bearing registration No.KL/11/V-6871 driven by the owner-cum-driver, the deceased Bijois Philip from Changanassery to Kozhikode and when they reached at Pulinchode at Aluva, the car dashed against the median of the road and the petitioner sustained serious injuries. The appellant/injured approached the Tribunal claiming a total compensation of Rs.4,60,000/-, which is limited to Rs.3,00,000/-. 3. The first, second, third and fourth respondents are the legal heirs of the owner-cum-driver of the vehicle and the fifth respondent is the insurer of the offending vehicle respectively before the Tribunal. Though notice was served on the respondents, the first to fourth respondents remained absent and were set ex parte. The fifth respondent filed a written statement admitting the insurance policy but disputed the accident. They contended that neither the insured, nor the respondents informed the occurrence to the fifth respondent. The car had a permit for 4 passengers. At the time of the accident, there were 6 passengers in the car. Since there was violation of the policy conditions, the fifth respondent was found not liable to indemnify the insured. Exts.A1 to A29 documents were marked on the side of the appellant. Exts.B1 to B3 were marked on the side of the respondent. PWs 1 and 2 were examined on the side of the appellant. The Tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a sum of Rs.50,806/- as compensation under different heads with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The fifth respondent is at liberty to recover the award amount from respondents 1 to 4, the legal representatives of the deceased owner-cum-driver of the car. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant/injured has come up in appeal. 4. The learned Counsel for the second appellant submits that the injured was aged 3 years at the time of accident and after filing of the appeal, the injured succumbed to injuries and the legal heir was impleaded as per order dated 07.11.2018 in I.A.No.3/2018. 5. 4. The learned Counsel for the second appellant submits that the injured was aged 3 years at the time of accident and after filing of the appeal, the injured succumbed to injuries and the legal heir was impleaded as per order dated 07.11.2018 in I.A.No.3/2018. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the second appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurer. Though notice was served on respondents 1 to 4, they chose not to appear before this court. 6. The learned counsel for the second appellant claims enhancement mainly under the following heads:- I. Pain and suffering: Though an amount of Rs.50,000/- was claimed towards the head pain and sufferings, the Tribunal had granted only an amount of Rs.20,000/-. Considering the fact that the injured was aged 3 years at the time of accident and she had sustained fracture shaft of left and right femur, I find that an additional amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) can be awarded under the afore head. II. Bystander expenses The Tribunal had taken only an amount of Rs.100 per day as bystander expenses for 8 days inpatient treatment for the injured. Since the accident is of the year 2006, the amount appears to be on the lower side. Hence, I am inclined to grant an amount of Rs.200/- per day for the afore head, totalling to an amount of Rs.1,600/- (8 x 200) The Tribunal had already granted an amount of Rs.800/-. Thus there will be an additional enhancement of Rs.800/- (Rupees Eight Hundred Only) under the said head. III. L oss of amenities in life The learned counsel for the second appellant had claimed an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards the afore head, but the Tribunal had granted an amount of Rs.10,000/-, which appears to be on the lower side. Considering the age and the nature of injuries sustained, I find that a total amount of Rs.25,000/- under the afore head would be just and reasonable. Thus there will be an additional amount of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) under the afore head. 6. 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. 7. Thus, the impugned award of the Tribunal is modified as follows: Sl. 6. 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. 7. 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.) Amount modified in appeal (in Rs.) Total compensation 1 Loss of earning Nil Nil 2 Partial loss of earning Nil Nil 3 Transport to hospital 4,000 1,000 (not modified) 1,000 4 Extra nourishment 3,000 2,000 (not modified) 2,000 5 Damage to clothing etc. 1,000 250 (not modified) 250 6 Medical expenses 25,000 16,756 (not modified) 16,756 7 Pain and suffering 50,000 20,000 20,000 40,000 8 Bystander expenses 3,000 800 800 1,600 9 Future medical expenses 15,000 Nil 10 Loss of amenities 25,000 10,000 15,000 25,000 11 Disability 2,40,000 Nil 12 Loss of earning power 1,00,000 Nil Total amount (limited to) 4,60,000 3,00,000 50,806 35,800 86,606 Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the second appellant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.35,800/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand Eight Hundred 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 second appellant shall furnish copies of the PAN Card, AADHAAR 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 second appellant at the earliest in accordance with law. However, the second appellant will not be entitled for the period of delay of 160 days in filing the appeal. On payment of the amount, the insurance company will be at liberty to recover the said amount from respondents 1 to 4, the legal representatives of the owner-cum-driver of the car.