the aforesaid assessment of disability of the appellant was conducted 02 years after the accident, meaning thereby, the disability was subsisting. It was claimed that on account of 60% disability suffered by the appellant, he had suffered 100% functional disability because of brain injury suffered by him. However, the Tribunal assessed the disability and loss in earning capacity only to the extent of 60%. 7. The age of the appellant was about 32 years at the time of the accident. Since the appellant fell in the age group between 31 to 35, multiplier 16 was applied for assessment of compensation, 7 Inadvertently, recorded as Ext. 16 in the High Court and Tribunal’s order. Page 5 of 14referring to the judgment of this Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another8. 8. While assessing the compensation, the Tribunal, in addition to the loss of future income calculated at 60% disability, awarded ₹50,000/- on account of mental agony, pain and suffering,