earnings. It is noticed that the monthly income was fixed by the Tribunal notionally as Rs.3,000/-. The claim of the petitioner in the Original Petition was that she was a catering worker earning Rs.6,000/- but evidence is not forthcoming to establish those aspects. The year of accident being 2010, the monthly income fixed by the Tribunal appears to this Court disproportionate to the price index and cost of living. This Court finds it reasonable to take Rs.6,000/-, the sum claimed by the petitioner herself as her monthly income for assessment of compensation. When loss of earnings is considered with the monthly income modified as Rs.6,000/- and the period as 8 months, Rs.48,000/- is arrived at. Rs.12,000/- being the sum stands awarded by the Tribunal, the petitioner will get Rs.36,000/- as additional compensation under that head. Towards transportation expenses and extra nourishment Rs.3,000/- and Rs.2,000/- respectively were awarded by the Tribunal. Those sums being inadequate, this Court is inclined to modify those to Rs.5,000/- each, so that the petitioner will get Rs.2,000/- and Rs.3,000/- respectively as additional