The court revised the notional income and disability assessment, leading to the modification of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

JUDGMENT

S.G. Pandit, J. - The claimant-injured is before this Court in this appeal praying for enhancement of compensation not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded under the judgment and award dated 16.02.2015 in M.V.C. No.2666/2013 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Member Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belgaum (for short 'the Tribunal').

2. The claim petition was filed under Section 166 of M.V. Act seeking compensation for the accidental injuries sustained in a road traffic accident involving motorcycle bearing No.KA-23/J-633 and a tractor-trailer bearing No.MH-09/AL- 9788. The accident involving the above two vehicles and the accidental injuries sustained by the claimant-appellant is not in dispute in this appeal. The claimant states that he was doing agricultural work and also running a flour mill and earning and Rs.1,00,000/- p.a. and Rs.15,000/- per month respectivley. He was aged about 60 years as on the date of accident. The tribunal on the material made available before it, awarded total compensation of Rs.1,20,800/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition till its realization by respondent No.2, on the following heads:

3. While awarding the above compensation, the tribunal assessed the monthly income of the injured-appellant at Rs.6,000/- per month and assessed the body disability at 10%. Not being satisfied with the same, the appellant is before this Court praying for enhancement of compensation.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant through Video Conference and the learned counsel for the respondent Insurance Company in person. Perused the trial Court records.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the income of the injured assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.6,000/- per month is on the lower side and prays for enhancement of income. He further submits that the injured was running flour mill and thereby earning Rs.15,000/- per month, apart from earning Rs.1,00,000/- p.a. from agricultural work. He submits that the Tribunal failed to consider the evidence of PW1 and also Exs.P7 and P18 Record of Rights and Ex.P14 electricity bills, which were placed on record to show that he was running flour mill. Further, the learned counsel submits that the claimant examined PW2, the Doctor in support of his case. He deposed that the claimant suffered 40% injuries to a particular limb, whereas, the tribunal has failed to assess the whole body disability properly. The assessment of whole body disability by the tribunal at 10% is on the lower side. Thus, he prays for enhancement of percentage of whole body disability. It is submitted that the claimant has suffered closed fracture of upper end of left tibia/lateral condoyle of tibia, fracture of neck of fibula. The claimant was inpatient for seven days and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal on the head pain and suffering and on the other heads when compared to the injuries sustained and also the treatment taken, are on the lower side. It is his submission that the claimant-injured suffered permanent physical disability, hence, the compensation awarded by the tribunal on the head loss of income during laid up period also needs to be enhanced. Thus, he prays for allowing the appeal.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 Insurance Company submits that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is just and correct, which needs no interference. Further, he submits that the income of the claimant assess