JUDGMENT : RAVI V. HOSMANI, J. 1. Though matter is listed for admission, with consent of learned counsel appearing for parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 2. Challenging common judgment and award dated 02.07.2021 passed by IV Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT-XV (‘tribunal’ for short) Vijayapur, in MVCs no.331/2019 and 332/2019, these appeals are filed. 3. Sri Koujalagi Chandrakant Laxman, learned counsel submitted, appeals were by claimants for enhancement of compensation. It was submitted on 04.02.2019 at about 3:30 p.m. when claimants were proceeding on motorcycle bearing no.KA-33/V-4338 on Kalakeri-Sindagi road, near Byakod Primary School, driver of Jeep bearing no.KA-28/N-5028 drove same in rash and negligent manner and dashed against motorcycle causing accident. In accident, claimants sustained grievous injuries and despite taking treatment, they sustained permanent physical disability/loss of earning capacity. Therefore filed claim petition against owner and insurer of Jeep under Section 166 of MV Act. 4. On contest, wherein owner-insurer appeared and filed objections admitting accident and stating that Jeep was insured and policy was in force as on date of accident, but denying age, income, occupation and loss of earning capacity by claimants and also alleging violation of policy conditions by insured, tribunal framed issues and recorded evidence. Claimants examined themselves as PWs.1 and 2 and Dr.Ashok Nayak, an orthopedic surgeon as PW3. Exhibits P.1 to P.18 were marked. Respondents did not lead evidence, but got marked copy of insurance policy with consent as Ex.R.1. 5. On consideration tribunal held accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of Jeep by its driver, claimants had sustained permanent physical disability/loss of earning capacity, vehicle was insured with insurer and therefore, claimants were entitled for compensation from insurer as follows: MVC No. 331/2019: S. No. Heads of compensation Amount 1 Injuries, pain and suffering Rs. 20,000/- 2 Loss of earning capacity on account of permanent physical disability Rs. 2,70,300/- 3 Medical expenses Rs. 1,27,412/- 4 Food, nourishment, special diet & incidental charges Rs. 5,000/- 5 Attendant and conveyance Charges Rs. 4,000/- 6 Loss of amenities Rs. 5,000/- 7 Loss of income during laid up period Rs. 26,500/- TOTAL Rs. 4,58,212/- MVC No. 332/2019: S. No. Heads of compensation Amount 1 Injuries, pain and suffering Rs. 20,000/- 2 Loss of earning capacity on account of permanent physical disability Rs. 2,16,240/- 3 Medical expenses Rs. 82,966/- 4 Food, nourishment, special diet & incidental charges Rs. 5,000/- 7 Loss of income during laid up period Rs. 26,500/- TOTAL Rs. 4,58,212/- MVC No. 332/2019: S. No. Heads of compensation Amount 1 Injuries, pain and suffering Rs. 20,000/- 2 Loss of earning capacity on account of permanent physical disability Rs. 2,16,240/- 3 Medical expenses Rs. 82,966/- 4 Food, nourishment, special diet & incidental charges Rs. 5,000/- 5 Attendant and conveyance charges Rs. 1,500/- 6 Loss of amenities Rs. 5,000/- 7 Loss of income during laid up period Rs. 26,500/- TOTAL Rs. 3,57,206/- 6. Not satisfied with compensation, claimants were in appeal. 7. Insofar as MVC no.331/2019 is concerned, it was submitted, though claimant sustained compound fracture of neck and upper 1/3rd of femur, fracture of right head of tibia and upper 1/3 of fibula, tribunal awarded only Rs.20,000/-towards pain and suffering. 8. It was submitted, PW3-Dr.Ashok Nayak examined claimant and assessed limb disability of 50-55%. However, tribunal considered functional disability at 10% which was on lower side. Though, claimant had taken inpatient treatment for 8 days, tribunal awarded only Rs.5,000/- towards food, nourishment and other incidental charges and Rs.4,000/- towards conveyance and attendant charges which was on lower side. Even award of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of amenities and Rs.26,500/- towards loss of income during laid-up period were also on lower side. On said grounds, sought for enhancement. 9. Insofar as MVC no.332/2019 is concerned, it was submitted claimant sustained fracture of upper 1/3 rd of fibula and compound fracture of lower 1/3 rd of fibula and tibia. Despite same, tribunal awarded only Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering. Though claimant had taken in-patient treatment for a period of 8 days, tribunal awarded only Rs.5,000/- towards food, nourishment and incidental charges and Rs.4,000/- towards attendant and conveyance charges which was on lower side. Award of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of amenities and Rs.26,500/- towards loss of income during laid up-period were also on lower side. It was submitted PW.3 had assessed limb disability at 40-45%, but tribunal had taken loss of functional disability at 8% which was on lower side. On said grounds, sought for enhancement. 10. On other hand, Smt.Preeti Patil Melkundi, learned counsel for respondent no.2-insurer opposed appeal. It was submitted tribunal had taken note of entire material placed on record by claimants and awarded compensation under each heads separately and same did not call for enhancement. 11. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned judgment and award. 12. On said grounds, sought for enhancement. 10. On other hand, Smt.Preeti Patil Melkundi, learned counsel for respondent no.2-insurer opposed appeal. It was submitted tribunal had taken note of entire material placed on record by claimants and awarded compensation under each heads separately and same did not call for enhancement. 11. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned judgment and award. 12. From above, since only claimants are in appeal for enhancement of compensation while insurer has accepted award, point that would arise for consideration is: “Whether claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation as sought for? 13. In MVC no.331/2019, claimant Ninganna was 30 years of age working as agriculturist and earning Rs.20,000/- per month, however, same was not substantiated. Therefore, tribunal rightly assessed it notionally at Rs.13,250/-. As rightly submitted, claimant sustained compound fracture of neck of femur, fracture of right head of tibia and upper 1/3 rd of fibula i.e., nature of both fractures would be major. Therefore, award of Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering would be inadequate, same is enhanced to Rs.50,000/-. 14. Tribunal awarded Rs.1,27,412/- towards medical expenses against bills. Since there is complete re-imbursement, there would be no scope for enhancement. 15. For inpatient period for treatment of 8 days, tribunal awarded Rs.9,000/- in total towards food, attendant and other incident expenses. Considering duration of treatment, same is found just and proper. 16. Normally, fractures take about three months to heal. Since monthly income was assessed at Rs.13,250/-, award towards loss of income during laid up period would be Rs.39,750/-. 17. Though, PW.3 assessed limb disability at 50-55%on ground that claimant was young person and there was chances of fractures being united as well as on ground that doctor who had treated claimant was not examined, tribunal moderated disability to only 10% and awarded compensation. Approaching of some other doctor for assessment of disability would not bar claimant for seeking enhancement as said doctor would be available for cross-examination. In instant case, claimant sustained fracture of both bones of lower limbs. Reason assigned for moderation by tribunal does not appear to be just and proper. Taking note of age and occupation of claimant, it would be appropriate to consider functional disability at 15%. Thus, loss of future income would be: Rs. 13,250 x 17 x 12 x 15% = Rs. 4,05,450/- 18. Reason assigned for moderation by tribunal does not appear to be just and proper. Taking note of age and occupation of claimant, it would be appropriate to consider functional disability at 15%. Thus, loss of future income would be: Rs. 13,250 x 17 x 12 x 15% = Rs. 4,05,450/- 18. Considering nature of disability sustained and age of claimant, award of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of amenities would be grossly inadequate, same is enhanced to Rs.35,000/-.Thus, total compensation would be: S. No. Heads of compensation Amount 1 Injuries, pain and suffering Rs. 50,000/- 2 Loss of earning capacity on account of permanent physical disability Rs. 4,05,450/- 3 Medical expenses Rs. 1,27,412/- 4 Food, nourishment, special diet & incidental charges Rs. 5,000/- 5 Attendant and conveyance Charges Rs. 4,000/- 6 Loss of amenities Rs. 35,000/- 7 Loss of income during laid up period Rs. 39,750/- TOTAL Rs. 6,66,612/- 19. In MVC no.332/2019, claimant Bhootappa was aged25 years working as agriculturist and stated to be earning Rs.20,000/- per month. In absence of specific material, tribunal assessed it notionally at Rs.13,250/-. Claimant sustained fractures of upper 1/3 rd of fibula and compound fracture of lower 1/3 rd of tibia and fibula, which would be major fractures. Therefore, award of Rs.20,000/- would be inadequate, same is enhanced to Rs.50,000/-. 20. For inpatient period of treatment for 3 days, tribunal has awarded Rs.6,500/- in total towards food, attendant and other incident expenses which appears just and proper. 21. Tribunal has awarded Rs.82,966/- towards medical expenses against bills. Since there is complete re-imbursement, there would be no scope for enhancement. 22. Normally fractures would take three months to heal.Since income is assessed at Rs.13,250/-, claimant would be entitled for Rs.39,750/- towards loss of income during laid up period. 23. PW.3 examined claimant and assessed limb disability at 40-45% on ground that claimant was young person and there was chances of fractures being united as well as on ground that doctor who had treated claimant was not examined, tribunal awarded disability to only 8% and awarded compensation. Taking note of age and occupation of claimant, it would be appropriate to consider functional disability at 12%.Thus, loss of future income would be: Rs. 13,250 x 18 x 12 x 12% = Rs. 3,43,440/- 24. Taking note of age and occupation of claimant, it would be appropriate to consider functional disability at 12%.Thus, loss of future income would be: Rs. 13,250 x 18 x 12 x 12% = Rs. 3,43,440/- 24. Considering nature of disability sustained and age of claimant, award of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of amenities would be grossly inadequate, same is enhanced to Rs.35,000/-.Thus, total compensation would be: S. No. Heads of compensation Amount 1 Injuries, pain and suffering Rs. 50,000/- 2 Loss of earning capacity on account of permanent physical disability Rs. 3,43,400/- 3 Medical expenses Rs. 82,966/- 4 Food, nourishment, special diet & incidental charges Rs. 5,000/- 5 Attendant and conveyance charges Rs. 1,500/- 6 Loss of amenities Rs. 35,000/- 7 Loss of income during laid up period Rs. 39,750/- TOTAL Rs. 5,57,616/- 25. Point for consideration is answered partly in affirmative, as above. Consequently, following: ORDER : i. Both appeals are allowed in part. ii. Judgment and award dated 02.07.2021 passed by IV Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT-XV, Vijayapur, in MVC nos.331/2019 and 332/2019, are modified. iii. Claimant in MVC no.331/2019 is held entitled for re-assessed compensation of Rs.6,66,612/- as against Rs.4,58,212/- awarded by Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from date of claim petition till deposit. iv. Claimant in MVC no.332/2019 is held entitled for re-assessed compensation of Rs.5,57,616/- as against Rs.3,57,206/- awarded by Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from date of claim petition till deposit. v. Respondent-insurer is directed to deposit enhanced compensation before Tribunal within a period of six weeks. vi. On deposit, conditions imposed by tribunal about fixed deposit and release would apply to enhanced compensation proportionately.