Judgment :- The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Transport Corporation against the Judgment and Decree passed on 8. 2005 in MCOP No.567/2004 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Erode. 2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:- On 04.04.2004 at about midnight, the deceased Suresh and his friend Thangaraj were travelling in an M80 Scooter bearing Registration No.TN-33-W-6240 on the Kangeyam to Erode Main Road from west to east direction on the left extremity of the road. The said M80 scooter was driven by one Thangaraj, who is the friend of the deceased Suresh. The deceased Suresh was a pillion rider. While they were nearing the Rajiv Nagar, Vaikkal Medu, the bus bearing Registration No.TN-29-N-1266 belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation came from east to west, i.e., opposite direction, on the wrong side, in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against a Tamarind tree and then dashed against the said M80 scooter. Due to the accident, the deceased Suresh and his friend Thangaraj sustained grievous head injuries and they died on the spot. The claimants are the father and mother of the deceased Suresh. They claimed a compensation of Rs.13,25,000/- before the Tribunal. The Transport Corporation resisted the claim. On pleading, the following issues were framed by the Tribunal:- a) Whether the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation? b) Whether the claimants are entitled for any compensation? If so, what is the amount and from whom? After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal was of the view that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,22,000/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition. Aggrieved by the award, the Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Transport Corporation has submitted that the Tribunal is wrong in holding that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation. It is also submitted that the award of the Tribunal is excessive and exorbitant, without basis and justification, and that therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside. 4. It is also submitted that the award of the Tribunal is excessive and exorbitant, without basis and justification, and that therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 / Caveator has submitted that the Tribunal had considered all the relevant materials and evidence available on record and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Hence the order passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with law. 5. Heard the counsel. On the side of the claimants, witnesses P.W.1 to P.W.5 were examined and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A23 were marked. On the side of the Transport Corporation, witness R.W.1 was examined, who is the third respondent and no documents were marked. P.W.1 is the mother of the deceased Suresh. P.W.2 is one Meenakshi. P.W.3 is one Sekaran @ Gnanasekaran, who is the eye witness. P.W.5 is one Chandran, who is the employer of the deceased Suresh. Ex.A1 is the certified xerox copy of F.I.R. in Cr.No.220/2004 of Kangayam Police Station. Ex.A2 is the certified xerox copy of Observation Mahazar. Ex.A3 is the certified xerox copy of Rough Sketch. Ex.A4 is the certified xerox copy of Motor Vehicle Inspectors Report in respect of vehicle TN-29-N-1266. Ex.A5 is the certified copy of charge sheet. Ex.A6 is the certified xerox copy of Post Mortem Certificate. Ex.A7 is the Legal Heirship Certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Kangayam. Ex.A8 is the S.S.L.C. Mark Sheet of the deceased Suresh. Ex.A9 is the Higher Secondary Course Certificate Mark Sheet of the deceased Suresh. Ex.A10 is the Transfer Certificate issued by the Principal, Cherrans Arts College, Kangayam, to the deceased Suresh. Ex.A11 is the Conduct Certificate issued by the Principal, Cherrans Arts and Science College, Kangayam, to the deceased Suresh. Ex.A12 is the certified copy of the Post Mortem Certificate. Ex.A13 is the Legal Heirship Certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Kangayam. Ex.A23 is the Salary Certificate issued by P.W.5 for the salary drawn by the deceased Suresh. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,22,000/-with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,22,000/-with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition. The details of the compensation are as under:- Rupees Loss of income - 1,20,000/- Funeral expenses - 2,000/- Total 1,22,000/- ========== Ex.A1 is the certified xerox copy of F.I.R. in Cr.No.220/2004 of Kangayam Police Station, which indicates that the accident had taken place at about 12.00 midnight on 04.04.2004 and a case in Crime No.220/2004 was registered at about 2.30 a.m. on 4. 2004 at Kangayam Police Station. After completing the investigation, the Investigation Officer laid the charge sheet as against one Ashokan, R.W.1. Documents Ex.A6 and Ex.A12-Post Mortem Certificates also show that the deceased Suresh sustained severe injuries in the accident. Ex.A3 is the rough sketch which also shows that the bus came to a halt 60 feet after hitting against the deceased. P.W.3 is one Sekaran @ Gnanasekaran, who is an eye witness to the accident. He stated in his proof affidavit that on 04.04.2004 at about 12.00 mid night he was travelling in a lorry from Sankari. When the lorry came near the Rajiv Nagar Vaikkal medu to ascertain about the address of the mill to which the load has to be supplied, the driver stopped the lorry and the cleaner went to enquire about the address. At that time, the M80 scooter bearing Registration No.TN-33-W-6240 was coming from west to east on the northern side of the road and the bus bearing Registration No.TN-29-N-1266 was coming in the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against a Tamarind tree and then against the M80 scooter and both the occupants of the scooter were thrown out and the cleaner of the lorry also was hit by the bus and then it came to a halt after hitting a road side neem tree and a road side shop and because of that, both the occupants of the scooter and the cleaner of the lorry died on the spot. R.W.1, the driver of the bus, has given evidence that he drove the vehicle very carefully and cautiously. R.W.1, the driver of the bus, has given evidence that he drove the vehicle very carefully and cautiously. But the evidence of R.W.1 was rejected by the Tribunal and the Tribunal relied on the evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.3, Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 and Ex.A12 and correctly came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation. The deceased Suresh was aged 19 years at the time of accident and he was studying I year B.Sc. P.W.1 is the mother of the deceased Suresh, has also produced the S.S.L.C. Mark Sheet of the deceased Suresh. Ex.A10 is the Transfer Certificate issued by the Principal, Cherrans Arts College, Kangayam, to the deceased Suresh, which indicates that he was studying I year B.Sc. Electronics. Further P.W.1 has also given evidence that the deceased Suresh was also helping his father in cultivation work and he was also working in an Electronic Shop as a part time worker and was earning Rs.5,000/- per month, but no documentary evidence produced to show the monthly income of the deceased Suresh. P.W.5 is one Chandran, who is the employer of the deceased Suresh. P.W.5 stated that he is running a firm in the name and style of Anoor Cool Centre and in their company, they were doing the job of repairing the Refrigerators, Air Conditioners and Washing Machines and the deceased Suresh was working in their company and he was paid Rs.2,000/-per month. Ex.A23 is the Salary Certificate issued by P.W.5 to the deceased Suresh, in which it was clearly stated that he was paid Rs.2,000/-per month as salary, but the Tribunal, instead of taking Rs.2,000/- per month, had taken only Rs.1,500/-per month, on the ground that the deceased Suresh was 19 years old at the time of accident and also the fact that he was a student studying I Year B.Sc. Electronics. Accordingly, the Tribunal fixed Rs.1,500/- as the monthly salary of the deceased Suresh. Thereafter, deducting 1/3rd of the amount towards personal expenses, arrived at Rs.1,000/-and the annual income was calculated at Rs.12,000/-. Taking into consideration the age of the parents of the deceased Suresh, the Tribunal adopted the multiplier of 10 and determined the loss of income at Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.12,000/-x 10). Thereafter, deducting 1/3rd of the amount towards personal expenses, arrived at Rs.1,000/-and the annual income was calculated at Rs.12,000/-. Taking into consideration the age of the parents of the deceased Suresh, the Tribunal adopted the multiplier of 10 and determined the loss of income at Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.12,000/-x 10). I feel that the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of income is very reasonable and the same is based on valid materials and evidence. Hence the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, which is reasonable and hence the same is confirmed. The findings given by the Tribunal are based on valid materials and evidence and I do not find any error or legal infirmity in the order of the Tribunal so as to warrant interference. The interest rate fixed by the Tribunal at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition is reasonable and hence the same is confirmed. 6. In view of the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in the appeal and hence the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.1,22,000/-with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition is confirmed. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2007 is closed. No costs. 7. The Transport Corporation is directed to deposit Rs.1,22,000/-with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, after adjusting the amount if any, already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On making such deposit, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the entire amount from the deposit.